Are Men or Women More Emotional? | INFJ Forum

Are Men or Women More Emotional?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 16771
  • Start date

In your experience, are men or women more emotional?

  • Men

    Votes: 3 50.0%
  • Women

    Votes: 3 50.0%

  • Total voters
    6
Status
Not open for further replies.
Based on the men I've been close to I think in some ways they're more emotional but you almost never get to see it unless you're allowed in.
 
I read of a study which reported that men tended to have stronger physiological responses to emotional stimuli, but reported a lower response than they were actually having. The opposite was true for women.

There were a number of categories of emotional stimuli presented to the subjects, and in each one the men had a marginally higher response, except one - 'heart-warming scenes'. In response to these, men were twice as reactive as women.


I'm also curious about qualitative differences in emotionality, too. There's the story of Stacy Horton (a man), who saved his wife over his 13-year-old son when their car plunged into a river in New Zealand. Commentary on this story tended to reveal that pretty much no woman could understand why Stacy chose his wife, but most men could and might make the same choice.
 
I'm also curious about qualitative differences in emotionality, too. There's the story of Stacy Horton (a man), who saved his wife over his 13-year-old son when their car plunged into a river in New Zealand. Commentary on this story tended to reveal that pretty much no woman could understand why Stacy chose his wife, but most men could and might make the same choice.
Here's a father of two sons on Quora, for instance, saying that his 'dirty little secret' is that he loves his wife more than his sons:

I can tell you what my wife and I have discussed if ever faced with a situation like this: always go with the baby.

Just as my wife was about to go into her planned C-section with our second son, she reiterated something we had discussed when we had an unplanned C-section with our older son: always go with the baby. If something happens to her and the nurses remove the baby from her arms (understandably) and then take him from the room, I am to follow him.

I cannot tell you how anti-instinctual that is for me, but I listened to her, both times and followed our son out of her operating room and into recovery to wait for her. Terrifying, might I add because I can't see her at this point and she's vulnerable, even though in trusted, skilled hands.

I love my wife. That's why we have our sons….they are the physical manifestation of our love. If all things were equal (to borrow Sarah’s qualifier), I’d save my son first. But I would die trying to save my wife too. The only reason I wouldn't save her first is because we've discussed it and I'd be pissed if roles were reversed and she didn't save our son.

This story does remind me of something I frequently say that is unpopular, which I’ll repeat here just because Quarans love controversy ;-). My dirty secret is that I love my wife more than my sons. I believe the best way I can love my boys and show them that is to love their mother well. So I support her, I care for her, and I argue with her….because I love her and my sons. But God-forbid one of them challenge my love for her, because I will side with her every time; even and especially if it comes down to saving one of their lives over hers.
 
They're equally emotional.
Men have deeper rooted emotions, women have more nuanced emotions.
 
If I recall correctly, surveys have shown that women are more likely to be "Feelers" than men (not sure what the odds are).

Feelers should theoretically be more cognizant of their emotions than Thinkers. Thinkers repress their emotions more, so they are probably more apt to have emotional control issues.

So I would think that it's more likely for women to be emotionally cognizant, and it's more likely for men to have issues related to emotional repression... but as we all know, there are plenty of Thinker women and Feeler men, so these kind of generalizations end up being poor due to all the variation.

Also, "emotional" is kind of a vacuous or at least confusing term without more context.
 
Last edited:
Commentary on this story tended to reveal that pretty much no woman could understand why Stacy chose his wife, but most men could and might make the same choice.

Lol there's no way I'd save that little shit
 
Something I have noticed anecdotally over many years is that when men suffer or struggle, it's typically due to an excess of emotion. The women I've been close to tend to have the opposite problem - their struggle is a lack of feeling; that is, depression.

I don't know if anybody else has noticed this.

Even if on the surface a guy 'looks depressed', nine times out of ten when you dig deep they have a storm going on inside them, and the 'looking depressed' is actually just an acceptable way for them to appear. And a woman - even if she looks chirpy on the outside - will be wrestling with a black hole inside.
 
Regardless of what gets said it can never be understated the chokehold society has over men as to what is and is not socially acceptable for men to express in stark contrast for what is allowed for women.

What? I've pretty much gotten away with everything I've said, lol. Women can't even get away with not smiling without being judged for it, and that's not even delving into the cultures of our world that still explicitly condone men dictating what women can and can't do (which I imagine impacts freedom of expression).

This also seems kinda off-topic.
 
I'm also curious about qualitative differences in emotionality, too. There's the story of Stacy Horton (a man), who saved his wife over his 13-year-old son when their car plunged into a river in New Zealand. Commentary on this story tended to reveal that pretty much no woman could understand why Stacy chose his wife, but most men could and might make the same choice.

I asked my husband the same question and he said he would save me.

I was upset over his answer and although I can understand why he would it, I would never be grateful for it. I would rather die in his place. I can’t bare to live without him and the grief of losing my child.

If the roles were reversed, I would save my kid.
 
I asked my husband the same question and he said he would save me.

I was upset over his answer and although I can understand why he would it, I would never be grateful for it. I would rather die in his place. I can’t bare to live without him and the grief of losing my child.

If the roles were reversed, I would save my kid.
Yep, that makes sense to me.

I think a lot of men would have to be convinced or locked into an agreement to save the kid over the spouse.
 
Women are emotional and can be dramatic about it. Men just have different ways of expressing (or the lack thereof) emotions but both can be emotional.

Women can be sensitive (as in easily hurt) and emotional about things (as in entitled to their feelings-subjective), men can be sensitive (as in aware and mindful) and emotional about things too (most are objective except for when they experienced it personally)

That said, we are all humans with emotions it's just that we have different ways of how we express, cope and think about it.

But to be honest, I find most women's emotions fleeting. It's easily expressed and accepted to be emotional as a woman, that it's "normal" and if a man is expressive, they're tagged as "emotional" right away.

I'm so conflicted with my opinion goodness me.
 
I'm in agreement with the majority here; there isn't really one that's more emotional than the other. Women are allowed to express their emotions more; men are expected to repress their feelings.
 
I think it's balanced.

I do think that women cycle through emotions much more than men though, so it would make them appear to be more emotional.

I think most guys can hide their emotions better than most women. It doesn't mean that they're not as emotional though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.