Women are more emotionally intelligent than men.

Jesus. The question wasn't whether women were more emotional, but whether they were more emotionally intelligent. I take that to mean, "are they more evolved in matters of the heart than men?" If I understand the question correctly, I say yes.

(Snood, were you on Abuzz? I remember you and some good comments.)

Yes

god i hate you (im the former manly)

Emotional intellect, can there be measure among the gender's. If so would the gender's be measured differently ?

i am great friends w/ many women. they are
more emotionaly atached. but guy have feelings
2. they are there in a different way. we have the same emotions and same amount. just in different forms.

I really think that people really like men better than women in the whole world, like everybody loves Kwame and Troy. I can't see any women that everybody loves! That is why I think men are really better than women overall!

It has been proven that the 2 hemisperes in the female brain show to hemi-sync or work in unision or more so than a mans.

Re: Women are more emotionally intelligent than men.


Hehehehe

Y...

hehehe

It i...

hehe

Oh bugger it. I can't discuss this seriously.

theantibudha;
Ah , come on.....give it a try !!!!!

How can they be more evolved than a being of the same species?

Very well, I'll fight back the laughter.

Firstly to anyone who didn't use the phrase "on average" unless you thought it was so obviously on average that it didn't need to be said, consider yourself slapped upside the head.

Every human being is quite a different person to the others around them. Being male or female can influence certain traits, but almost never to the point where all females are more X than all males or vice versa.

For example the strongest male is going to be stronger than the strongest female. That's pretty much unavoidable. Yet that doesn't mean that Man A. is going to be stronger than Woman B.

Secondly, to anyone who believes that it's possible for men to sleep around more than women WITHOUT said men being gay consider yourself slapped upside the head yet again. It takes two to tango. Thus if we momentarily ignore homosexuality, masturbation and 3+somes, then the number of times men have had sex is EXACTLY equal to the number of time women have had sex.

Women don't sleep around less. They just lie about it more on average. (proven in scientific studies, the answers women give when they believe themselves to be hooked up to a lie detector show a large ammount of difference, the answers men give almost never change).

Thirdly, to anyone who thinks women are better communicators, excuse me while I chortle into my morning coffee. Let me give you an example from a recent movie, Dr. Love (I haven't actually seen the film, this is from the preview).

MAN: "Oh, is that diet coke or normal?"
WOMAN: *throws drink in his face*
Dr LOVE: "By asking whether it was diet coke you implied that she needed to lose weight"

That a hollywood release would be stereotypical and exaggerated is certainly true, but this example reads chillingly true to many of my friends' dates. On average women frequent read about ten pages of subtext into a single page of text. Whereas men generally read about one page of subtext into ten.

When women wonder why the men in their lives don't understand what they're saying its because they never actually said it. Men are used to actually saying what they intend to communicate rather than implying it in scattered dropped hints through ten different conversations across a month. They also become confused when women suddenly claim that they have said something they never said because it's been drawn out the subtexts of ten different conversations across a month.

Seeing patterns absolutely everywhere isn't a sign of superior intelligence. It's a sign of schizophrenia. Likewise women's complications of rational conversations isn't a sign of superior emotional intelligence but rather emotional schizophrenia.

This third comment hardly applies to all women. It's another "on average" matter.

How to get into this without being neutered by either side...

As everyone knows, men and women are polar opposites, though neither is stronger than the other overall, they compliment each other. Both women and men have developed skills which suit the roles they perform in life.

I wouldn't say that women are more emotionally intelligent than men, but I am pretty sure they understand emotion better than men do. I am not sure if this has to do with upbringing, and those pesky gender roles drilled into our heads since we were babies and our parents decorated our rooms pink/blue.
Women's are usually more guarded than men, more subtle in their approach.
Men on the other hand choose a more blunt approach, they are usually easy to figure out too.

So I would say that women can use emotion better than men, I can't say if that makes them more emotionally intelligent though.

Hey Guyz! I'm new here! JoeFX might recognize the name though! I just wanted to point out that answering that question either yes/no is practically impossible because not EVERY woman is as emotionally intelligent as others and not EVERY man is as emotionally 'dumb' as others. I, being a man, am very emotionally intelligent and personally only see sex as an option if i am 100% dedicated to that person! Thanx 4 hearing me out guyz!

Hey Wales. Pleasure to meet you.

What makes you believe that requiring 100% dedication before sex is requisite to being emotionally intelligent? I have no doubt that you are at least normally intelligent since you appreciate the idea of averages. But emotionally intelligent... is that inversely proportionate to one's "sluttiness"? If so, why?

I just got the wrong end of the stick. I realise sex doesn't have MUCH to do with it. Even so, i still believe women are more emotonally intelligent than men, as men tend to see showing emotion as a sign of weakness.

And this is what makes people emotionally stupid? Your emotional intelligence is proportionate to the degree to which you express your emotions?

Perhaps I am too idealistic, but I have always felt that men and women are complementary, that is that their union in spirit and practical partnership completes a conceptual "oneness". This sounds terribly like "Left Coast" speak but it has truth in my relationship with my wife (The State legal condoning of this relationship via the institution of marriage is not and has never been a necessary requirement to form this union). I supply certain elements towards the partnership and my wife others. I am lucky to have this relationship and realize that others are less so.

The specifics of specialization in the relationship (Who does what and when) is worked out by the two individuals. Perhaps stress in the relationship occurs when one partner has to take on too much or that function which is better performed by one is artificially assigned to the other via socially accepted mores (Men must be the bread winner while Women raise the children). I am not such an expert and my observations are purely anecdotal but it would seem that this coupling or pairing is a continual work in progress, both parties working and searching for the exact balance that allows the union to act as one entity and work towards many common goals. The goals, as well as the domicile, must be shared, otherwise the relationship becomes dysfunctional.

This is just my take and others might modify or totally disagree with my comments to fit their own perceptions. I have been chastised for using the term "The total is more than the some of the parts" before, but, although quite mushy, it seems apt here.

JM

One assumes that you married your wife because she was someone complimentary to you. It doesn't necessarily follow that every woman is complimentary for every man.

An ideal relationship is certainly formed though between two people whose natures compliment one another enabling them to function effectively as a partnership. This may be friendship or love, and exists regardless of gender.

You say many other things in your post, and I'm not going to bother requoting them, I'll simply say that I agree with your post absolutely.

I hear a LOT that it's to men's evolutionary advantage, and it's their nature, to sleep around as much as possible, while women generally seek a single partner who offers security & protection.

I disagree with this whole premise. I think it's just as much an evolutionary advantage for women to seek multiple partners as men...for the obvious reason that, the more men a woman sleeps with, the more likely it is that ONE of them will believe he's the father. Having a dozen "fathers" for one child will offer a great deal more protection than having one.

I often think matriarchal societies supported & lived by this premise. Until very recently, it could never be known who the father was....only the mother could be known for sure. Thus it was (and is) to a female's advantage to have as many males as possible hanging about thinking "this child could be mine....'