carefreewannabe:




Proud to be your e-sister.

you might never understand the gravity of these words but they mean so much to me, so much. Love you so much e-sister. Good night.

carefreewannabe:


No, I don't agree. This is your copy and paste interpretation that aims at proving that females are less likely to make sound decisions and this is se*xism at its worst.

Sexism?
This is your next baseless accusation?

This is the reason I told you sometime ago to always take care when typing comments, you almost always let your feelings and emotions becloud your objectivity - and it's even worse that you don't know when you're doing it so you can stop.

These are what you have tried to prove/pass across so far:

- Based on a meta-analysis reviewing data from hundreds of studies and released this year by the American Psychological Association, NBC News has a provocative new report concerning the extent of boys’ academic underachievement: overall, girls do better than boys at all ages, in all subjects, all over the world. Yes, even in math.

- Furthermore, women have higher IQs and girls have long outperformed boys in ALL school subjects, which must make us re-consider if we can afford it to claim that women should be the ones to take on traditional gender roles and that men should be the HEAD, when their heads perform worse concerning IQ tests and school performance.

- SO even if we believe the interpretation of the studies you have quoted that women are more emotional, we must also consider that women are better at controlling emotions, which makes men (not women) more prone to acting and decision making based on emotions.

So I guess going by these interpretations of yours, you're a major sexist huh? ...and the worst kind if I may add.
Also worthy of mention is that these interpretations of yours are just the ones I picked up from the previous page alone.

So who's the real sexist here?
All I've done so far is lay out my arguments to counter your female gender-appraisal points - I didn't start this thread in case you forgot.

And about my source, did you just call it a copy and paste interpretation? Lol...
A source that you couldn't counter with valid points but chose to discredit the author.

What about the second link I gave ya, with the neuro-anatomists and anatomists contributing to the journal - don't they have enough knowledge to make their claims as well?

Please come back with another point, there is none here.

carefreewannabe:


Women have been told for ages that they were born to stay at home and push out babies. They were not only told to do so, they were even forced to do so. Gender equality will help them to catch up.

No more you are only good enough to have a place in the kitchen. No more bondage.

Good to know.

However, women have been able to do what they want in the west since after the 1840's inception of the women's rights movement - catching up shouldn't be taking this long.

By the way, IQ research has shown that there are slightly more males with an IQ above the average but they have also shown that male id*iots (men with an IQ below average) also outnumber women.

Have you lost track of yourself as usual again?

Didn't you just accuse me of 'sexism' in your other post, yet here you are shooting yourself in the foot.

Quit speaking/typing comments from both sides of your mouth!

So next time, you pass a judgment on someone's ability to think reasonably and not based on emotions, consider the individual, not the gender.

Honestly, having this back and forth with you didn't even do well to disprove the generally prevalent notion of females being more emotional.
You have found a way to make your subtle ineffective remarks every time - the last time you did and I fed you back just a tiny bit, you returned to call the response emotional even after admitting you were initially provocative.


Now also take a look at this your friend that keeps quoting and making references to me, she can't even take a hint...

Don't mind him with his silly interpretation. How does having more white matter equate to being more emotional?
Don't get me started on that silly article he put up that implied brains with high blood flow are prone to emotional stress.

Instead of taking a humble walk after making a joke of herself all over the thread, she keeps coming back to try to redeem what's left of her failing self-esteem like a wounded and helpless little cat on heat

Saying hormones have no effect on the brain, then next calling a best-selling author and PhD holder a dunce.. Lol, I can't even take this one serious.

Dheartless:
.
Managing
Emotions involves the participation of
emotions in thought and the ability to allow
thought to include emotions. Optimal levels of
emotional regulation likely will neither
minimize nor exaggerate emotion.
http://www.harrisconsult.com/files/MSCEIT
%20report.PDF

did actually see the above part of the article you read, that was posted by Nonso23?

1: managing emotion involves the PARTICIPATION of emotions in thought and to ALLOW thought to INCLUDE emotions.

2: OPTIMAL levels of emotional REGULATION likely will NEITHER MINIMIZE nor exaggerate emotion.

managing emotions involves being more affected by emotions even allowing it to affect your thoughts

women allow emotions more

regulation/managing emotions will likely not change the level of feelings of a person weither minimise or exergerate

women make no change in the effect of managing emotions in respect to their level of emotions or feelings at any given time

men don't allow emotions to affect their thought because they are not emotion managers

I have already explained it all in the context of the study. My posts above have addressed this. Please read the study if you want a full grasp of the issue. Not starting another back and forth. All I'm waiting for are some definitions with sources right now.

crackhaus:

Good to know.

However, women have been able to do what they want in the west since after the 1840's inception of the women's rights movement - catching up shouldn't be taking this long.


Have you lost track of yourself as usual again?

Didn't you just accuse me of 'sexism' in your other post, yet here you are shooting yourself in the foot.

Quit speaking/typing comments from both sides of your mouth!


Honestly, having this back and forth with you didn't even do well to disprove the generally prevalent notion of females being more emotional.
You have found a way to make your subtle ineffective remarks every time - the last time you did and I fed you back just a tiny bit, you returned to call the response emotional even after admitting you were initially provocative.


Now also take a look at this your friend that keeps quoting and making references to me, she can't even take a hint...


Instead of taking a humble walk after making a joke of herself all over the thread, she keeps coming back to try to redeem what's left of her failing self-esteem like a wounded and helpless little cat on heat

Saying hormones have no effect on the brain, then next calling a best-selling author and PhD holder a dunce.. Lol, I can't even take this one serious.

I dear you to quote the part where I said that.
What I said was to ask you what you know about female hormones. That was after you said females are emotional due to their hormones.
It's true Females hormones stimulate the brain but it has nothing to do with being emotional.
And next time you talk on biological features, put up articles backed up by scientist, not a pschologist.

It seems you only come on this thread to look for my posts to quote and expose your ignorance - if you have been following my discourse with carefree, you would have seen the second link I gave her.
The author of that is an anatomist, the journal also references studies from numerous neuro-anatomists and other brain-related experts.

And what's this thing about psychologists you keep going on about? So a psychologist isn't a scientist? Lol...you will keep exposing yourself if I don't stop you.

global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/481700/psychology

Psychology - scientific discipline that studies psychological and biological processes and behaviour in humans and other animals.
The discipline of psychology is broadly divisible into two parts: a large profession of practitioners and a smaller but growing science of mind , brain , and social behaviour. The two have distinctive goals, training, and practices, but some psychologists integrate the two.

www-personal.umich.edu/~jeda/PsychologyEncyclopediaBritannicaArticle.htm

- Psychology is intimately related to the biological and social sciences.

- The issues studied by psychologists cover a wide spectrum comprising learning, cognition, intelligence, motivation, emotion, perception, personality, mental
disorders, and the study of the extent to which individual differences are inherited or are shaped environmentally, known as behaviour genetics.

Hey genius, a psychologist is called a scientist when he/she uses scientific methods to do research and acquire knowledge.

crackhaus:

Good to know.

However, women have been able to do what they want in the west since after the 1840's inception of the women's rights movement - catching up shouldn't be taking this long.

Wrong!

Let me give you examples!

In Germany, a country that is part of what people refer to as "the West", a husband had to give his wife permission if she wanted to work until 1977.
In the USA women were not allowed to vote nationally till the 1920s.
In the UK, at the beginning of the 20th century it was very difficult for women to obtain a university education. By 1910 there were just over a thousand women students at Oxford and Cambridge. However, they had to obtain permission to attend lectures and were not allowed to take degrees.

So your statement that women in "the West" were allowed to do whatever they wanted since the 1840s is utterly wrong.

Get your facts right, please.

Have you lost track of yourself as usual again?
Didn't you just accuse me of 'sexism' in your other post, yet here you are shooting yourself in the foot.Quit speaking/typing comments from both sides of your mouth!

Do you know what s*exism is?

Honestly, having this back and forth with you didn't even do well to disprove the generally prevalent notion of females being more emotional.
You have found a way to make your subtle ineffective remarks every time - the last time you did and I fed you back just a tiny bit, you returned to call the response emotional even after admitting you were initially provocative.

Well, having this back and forth conversation with you showed that you are very emotional. You insulted me and you made snappish remarks.

I said I made a provocative statement using exaggeration in a rather humorous way to point out that using research to discriminate against gender can go both ways if people choose to do so.

You reacted in a very emotional way to it. If you had not, you would have been able to see the deeper meaning.

Now also take a look at this your friend that keeps quoting and making references to me, she can't even take a hint...


Instead of taking a humble walk after making a joke of herself all over the thread, she keeps coming back to try to redeem what's left of her failing self-esteem like a wounded and helpless little cat on heat

How am I responsible for someone else's comments? Besides I don't think that she is more emotional and passionate than you.

Saying hormones have no effect on the brain, then next calling a best-selling author and PhD holder a dunce.. Lol, I can't even take this one serious.

I have not said that hormones have no effect on the brain but what you forget is that the male brain is also affected by hormones.

crackhaus:

Sexism?
This is your next baseless accusation?

This is the reason I told you sometime ago to always take care when typing comments, you almost always let your feelings and emotions becloud your objectivity - and it's even worse that you don't know when you're doing it so you can stop.

Well, it is obvious your posts are very emotional so please take your own advice.

These are what you have tried to prove/pass across so far:

- Based on a meta-analysis reviewing data from hundreds of studies and released this year by the American Psychological Association, NBC News has a provocative new report concerning the extent of boys’ academic underachievement: overall, girls do better than boys at all ages, in all subjects, all over the world. Yes, even in math.

- Furthermore, women have higher IQs and girls have long outperformed boys in ALL school subjects, which must make us re-consider if we can afford it to claim that women should be the ones to take on traditional gender roles and that men should be the HEAD, when their heads perform worse concerning IQ tests and school performance.

- SO even if we believe the interpretation of the studies you have quoted that women are more emotional, we must also consider that women are better at controlling emotions, which makes men (not women) more prone to acting and decision making based on emotions.


So I guess going by these interpretations of yours, you're a major sexist huh? ...and the worst kind if I may add.
Also worthy of mention is that these interpretations of yours are just the ones I picked up from the previous page alone.
So who's the real sexist here?

How are the statements in italics an interpretation?
I have quoted results, I have not interpreted them.

All I've done so far is lay out my arguments to counter your female gender-appraisal points - I didn't start this thread in case you forgot.

No, you use research to prove that women are less logical and there is a lot of evidence that it is wrong to say so.

And about my source, did you just call it a copy and paste interpretation? Lol...
A source that you couldn't counter with valid points but chose to discredit the author.

Yes it is a poor interpretation.

You said that women have more white matter and that's why they are more emotional.

Do you even know the function of the white matter in the brain?

But what is white matter? You could refer to it as the subway of the brain – connecting different regions of grey matter in the cerebrum to one another. Imagine living in a city and having to walk from one area to another 5 miles away; transport makes this much more fluent and helps make your tasks easier. This is pretty much the same for your brain!

White matter is fast. This is thanks to the electrically insulating myelin sheaths (formed by glial cells) encasing each neuron’s process transmitting signals to other neurons. Nervous transmissions are quick, meaning regions of grey matter can connect and keep in contact with one another. Funnily enough, these myelin sheaths are what gives white matter its pinkish-white colour. Similar to a subway, the white matter mostly remains deeper underneath the surface with its many links and passages.
What about the second link I gave ya, with the neuro-anatomists and anatomists contributing to the journal - don't they have enough knowledge to make their claims as well?

http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2014/03/14/the-subway-of-the-brain-why-white-matter-matters/

So tell me how more white matter makes a person more emotional but does not enable the person to think more logically and even more quickly?

Please come back with another point, there is none here.

I have.

okotv:
you might never understand the gravity of these words but they mean so much to me, so much. Love you so much e-sister. Good night.

You are my sunshine.

Stay the way you are. Don't allow anyone or anything to change your heart.

carefreewannabe:

Wrong!

Let me give you examples!

In Germany, a country that is part of what people refer to as "the West", a husband had to give his wife permission if she wanted to work until 1977.
In the USA women were not allowed to vote nationally till the 1920s.
In the UK, at the beginning of the 20th century it was very difficult for women to obtain a university education. By 1910 there were just over a thousand women students at Oxford and Cambridge. However, they had to obtain permission to attend lectures and were not allowed to take degrees.

So your statement that women in "the West" were allowed to do whatever they wanted since the 1840s is utterly wrong.

Get your facts right, please.

You need facts?

Timeline of key events in the Women's Rights Movement:

1848 - The first women's rights convention is held in Seneca Falls, New York. After 2 days of discussion and debate, 68 women and 32 men sign a Declaration of Sentiments, which outlines grievances and sets the agenda for the women's rights movement. A set of 12 resolutions is adopted calling for equal treatment of women and men under the law and voting rights for women.

1850 - The first National Women's Rights Convention takes place in Worcester, Mass., attracting more than 1,000 participants. National conventions are held yearly (except for 1857) through 1860.

See the concluding part at:
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html

http://www.ibiblio.org/prism/mar98/path.html

Do a proper research and get your own facts right, you don't always need to be belligerent to appear knowledgeable - I did say since after the 1840's inception right?

Do you know what s*exism is?

I don't care about it, did you invent the word?

[s]Well, having this back and forth conversation with you showed that you are very emotional. You insulted me and you made snappish remarks.

I said I made a provocative statement using exaggeration in a rather humorous way to point out that using research to discriminate against gender can go both ways if people choose to do so.

You reacted in a very emotional way to it. If you had not, you would have been able to see the deeper meaning.

How am I responsible for someone else's comments? Besides I don't think that she is more emotional and passionate than you.[/s]

Bollocks!

You still haven't repented from flat-out lying to save face - this is a psychological disorder.

I have not said that hormones have no effect on the brain but what you forget is that the male brain is also affected by hormones.

You couldn't decipher that part wasn't meant for you? The recipient already saw it and replied it - keep losing track of yourself.

carefreewannabe:

Well, it is obvious your posts are very emotional so please take your own advice.

Still trying to make yourself feel better, are you?

How are the statements in italics an interpretation?
I have quoted results, I have not interpreted them.

You're starting to bore me, do I have to explain everything?
Again like I corrected you a while ago, I did put specific bits of text in bold for a reason - those are your interpretations on what you like to fantasize about, your sources didn't type them.

No, you use research to prove that women are less logical and there is a lot of evidence that it is wrong to say so.

My source, your source... I thought we were past the point where you have your sources and I have mine

[s]Yes it is a poor interpretation.

You said that women have more white matter and that's why they are more emotional.

Do you even know the function of the white matter in the brain?

But what is white matter? You could refer to it as the subway of the brain – connecting different regions of grey matter in the cerebrum to one another. Imagine living in a city and having to walk from one area to another 5 miles away; transport makes this much more fluent and helps make your tasks easier. This is pretty much the same for your brain!

White matter is fast. This is thanks to the electrically insulating myelin sheaths (formed by glial cells) encasing each neuron’s process transmitting signals to other neurons. Nervous transmissions are quick, meaning regions of grey matter can connect and keep in contact with one another. Funnily enough, these myelin sheaths are what gives white matter its pinkish-white colour. Similar to a subway, the white matter mostly remains deeper underneath the surface with its many links and passages.
What about the second link I gave ya, with the neuro-anatomists and anatomists contributing to the journal - don't they have enough knowledge to make their claims as well?

http://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2014/03/14/the-subway-of-the-brain-why-white-matter-matters/

So tell me how more white matter makes a person more emotional but does not enable the person to think more logically and even more quickly?

I have.[/s]

Of course you are an academic of international acclaim, only you hold the knowledge and ingenuity required to discredit interpretations.

It's after I make it clear to you that you couldn't counter an argument with valid points but instead chose to discredit an author who is way above your league in academics, you now decide to go online to scramble for articles on 'white matter' while totally confusing yourself in the process.

Everything you need to know about 'white matter' is already on those sources, and it is not the only thing responsible for the differences between the genders - you still haven't read that second link I gave you I presume, else you won't be here talking all these about 'my interpretations'.

The journal on that second link is extensive, go read it - my interpretations are not there, I didn't write it...but I know you still won't like the interpretations of the neuro-anatomists.

crackhaus:
It seems you only come on this thread to look for my posts to quote and expose your ignorance - if you have been following my discourse with carefree, you would have seen the second link I gave her.
The author of that is an anatomist, the journal also references studies from numerous neuro-anatomists and other brain-related experts.

And what's this thing about psychologists you keep going on about? So a psychologist isn't a scientist? Lol...you will keep exposing yourself if I don't stop you.

global.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/481700/psychology



www-personal.umich.edu/~jeda/PsychologyEncyclopediaBritannicaArticle.htm


Hey genius, a psychologist is called a scientist when he/she uses scientific methods to do research and acquire knowledge.

Who's following who?
Irrc, you were the first to quote my post on this thread.
And whatever you put up there doesn't change the fact that psychologist are not specialists in biological sciences field. To my best of knowledge, a psychologist job is to find how man relates with his environment and even then, his interpretation is based on medical researches which your said man failed to do.

Psychologists are not specialist in one discipline, they are never here or there in the sense that they combine 2 or more disciplines together and find the relationship between them.
Let me give you 1 bit of advice, don't just swallow every gibberish you see, try to engage your brain!
Still waiting for you to quote the part I said hormones has no effect on the brain.

Women are more emotional than men.that why most women requires emotional support d guy in a relationship and it is 38 percent reason why relationship fails. And also we don't want to get into how emotional a woman is when pregnant. Whether dis emotions affects a woman thinking is still up 4 debate it can either d true or not. but women are more emotional.

Shirley07:

To my best of knowledge, a psychologist job is to find how man relates with his environment and even then, his interpretation is based on medical researches which your said man failed to do.

Lol, you're irredeemable! The solution to your problem is right in that statement in bold, albeit very poorly constructed.

I already inferred earlier on how extensive your knowledge is and on the academic qualifications you possess, yet you keep blabbing on and on about the profession of the author and now telling me what he failed to do? Really?
I have provided a source on this topic from a neuro-anatomist and still explained psychology using sources as well, still you keep being stubborn and eager to embarrass yourself...

If I were the type to take jabs at your spellings and sentence construction so far, you would really dislike me more than you already do.

Please don't quote me again.

crackhaus:

Lol, you're irredeemable! The solution to your problem is right in that statement in bold, albeit very poorly constructed.

I already inferred earlier on how extensive your knowledge is and on the academic qualifications you possess, yet you keep blabbing on and on about the profession of the author and now telling me what he failed to do? Really?
I have provided a source on this topic from a neuro-anatomist and still explained psychology using sources as well, still you keep being stubborn and eager to embarrass yourself...

If I were the type to take jabs at your spellings and sentence construction so far, you would really dislike me more than you already do.

Please don't quote me again.

Why don't you? Or did you forget it's a free world?
As long as I'm able to pass my message across, I don't care what your shitbrain thinks about my construction of sentences.
I advised you to engage your brain but you seems not to take heed because if you did, you would notice the defination I gave correlates with what you put up there and this I did without having to run helter-skelter like you did.
It's quite funny you keep talking about the 2nd link you provided which has nothing to do with the first source you put up. If you had bothered to check those sources you put up, you would have noticed the author gave no reason whatsoever for his views. How does having large amount of white matter and blood flows equates to being more emotional? Do the author even know the functions of the white matter or vascularization?
Whatever that brain of yours think, I'm still waiting for the post I said hormones has no effect on the brain, lieing shithead.

crackhaus:

Still trying to make yourself feel better, are you?


You're starting to bore me, do I have to explain everything?
Again like I corrected you a while ago, I did put specific bits of text in bold for a reason - those are your interpretations on what you like to fantasize about, your sources didn't type them.


My source, your source... I thought we were past the point where you have your sources and I have mine


Of course you are an academic of international acclaim, only you hold the knowledge and ingenuity required to discredit interpretations.

It's after I make it clear to you that you couldn't counter an argument with valid points but instead chose to discredit an author who is way above your league in academics, you now decide to go online to scramble for articles on 'white matter' while totally confusing yourself in the process.

Everything you need to know about 'white matter' is already on those sources, and it is not the only thing responsible for the differences between the genders - you still haven't read that second link I gave you I presume, else you won't be here talking all these about 'my interpretations'.

The journal on that second link is extensive, go read it - my interpretations are not there, I didn't write it...but I know you still won't like the interpretations of the neuro-anatomists.

Maybe you are able to use more than one source to get more information and to tell me what the function of white matter is.

Please answer my question:

What is the function of the white matter in the brain?

crackhaus:

You need facts?

Timeline of key events in the Women's Rights Movement:

1848 - The first women's rights convention is held in Seneca Falls, New York. After 2 days of discussion and debate, 68 women and 32 men sign a Declaration of Sentiments, which outlines grievances and sets the agenda for the women's rights movement. A set of 12 resolutions is adopted calling for equal treatment of women and men under the law and voting rights for women.

1850 - The first National Women's Rights Convention takes place in Worcester, Mass., attracting more than 1,000 participants. National conventions are held yearly (except for 1857) through 1860.

See the concluding part at:
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/womenstimeline1.html

http://www.ibiblio.org/prism/mar98/path.html

Do a proper research and get your own facts right, you don't always need to be belligerent to appear knowledgeable - I did say since after the 1840's inception right?


I don't care about it, did you invent the word?


Bollocks!

You still haven't repented from flat-out lying to save face - this is a psychological disorder.


You couldn't decipher that part wasn't meant for you? The recipient already saw it and replied it - keep losing track of yourself.

So the sources you quoted PROVE that women were able to do what they wanted in the West since the 1840s?

Even if in Germany they were not allowed to work without husband's permission till the late 1970s?
Even if they were not allowed to vote in the USA till the beginning of the 20th century?
Even if they were not allowed to obtain degrees n the UK at the beginning of the 20th century?

Despite all these facts, you will claim that women were allowed to do whatever they wanted in the West since the 1840s?

REALLY!??

carefreewannabe:


Maybe you are able to use more than one source to get more information and to tell me what the function of white matter is.

Please answer my question:

What is the function of the white matter in the brain?

Listen, I'm tired of this back and forth - no matter the explanations, sources, journals, articles, arguments and counter-arguments we engage in, you're incapable of accepting anything that proves women are generally more emotional than men.

I don't know if you suffer from a general disconnect with reality so much that you can't see for yourself how true that fact is, I keep having these brief moments every time I read a comment from you that you may have a psychological problem rooted in some form of self-loathing or maybe a bipolar medical condition.

There are times you start off on good footing but once anyone successfully tutors you and counters your stand, you find it difficult accepting and moving on - instead you find a way to go on a tangent and bring unrelated points hopelessly trying to salvage your situation.

Women are much more emotional than men, men are more adept at accessing, analyzing, and deciding the importance or lack of before reacting in certain situations - this is the logic.
I have seen it play out so many times even in women who appear strong-willed, loud, and appear unshakable - it's usually just so on the exterior...more like a front.
The most outspoken/loud woman is inherently more emotional than the most laid-back quiet dude.

Like I advised before, you should dwell on the advantages of a female brain's features over that of males, there are a fair number of these if you research on it - leave this dissatisfaction with yourself and quit exposing your insecurities, you're a woman...be a woman and love yourself for it.

The functions of white matter are already in that writeup of yours where you were confusing yourself - it is basically a regulator for electrical signals (connecting).
Women have 9 times more of it, while men have 6.5 times more of gray matter.

Your job is to go research on the role this information plays in how emotional responses differ in the genders, but remember this is just one part of the larger picture.
Google is there for ya, but if you still ain't convinced - make an appointment with a doctor and let them explain it to you as a favour, but i have a feeling you may just need the treatment offered by a therapist at the end of the day.

Shirley07 you're a doofus, stop quoting me.

crackhaus:

Listen, I'm tired of this back and forth - no matter the explanations, sources, journals, articles, arguments and counter-arguments we engage in, you're incapable of accepting anything that proves women are generally more emotional than men.

I don't know if you suffer from a general disconnect with reality so much that you can't see for yourself how true that fact is, I keep having these brief moments every time I read a comment from you that you may have a psychological problem rooted in some form of self-loathing or maybe a bipolar medical condition.

There are times you start off on good footing but once anyone successfully tutors you and counters your stand, you find it difficult accepting and moving on - instead you find a way to go on a tangent and bring unrelated points hopelessly trying to salvage your situation.

Women are much more emotional than men, men are more adept at accessing, analyzing, and deciding the importance or lack of before reacting in certain situations - this is the logic.
I have seen it play out so many times even in women who appear strong-willed, loud, and appear unshakable - it's usually just so on the exterior...more like a front.
The most outspoken/loud woman is inherently more emotional than the most laid-back quiet dude.

Like I advised before, you should dwell on the advantages of a female brain's features over that of males, there are a fair number of these if you research on it - leave this dissatisfaction with yourself and quit exposing your insecurities, you're a woman...be a woman and love yourself for it.

The functions of white matter are already in that writeup of yours where you were confusing yourself - it is basically a regulator for electrical signals (connecting).
Women have 9 times more of it, while men have 6.5 times more of gray matter.

Your job is to go research on the role this information plays in how emotional responses differ in the genders, but remember this is just one part of the larger picture.
Google is there for ya, but if you still ain't convinced - make an appointment with a doctor and let them explain it to you as a favour, but i have a feeling you may just need the treatment offered by a therapist at the end of the day.

Were you too emotional to put your arguments forward without repeatedly insulting me?

Interesting.

No need to use google.

It is enough to compare your responses with mine to see that you are unable to control your emotions.

Brain Facts To Know And Share: Men Have A Lower Percentage Of Gray Matter Than Women

http://www.medicaldaily.com/brain-facts-know-and-share-men-have-lower-percentage-gray-matter-women-292530

Does this source explain why you can only rely on one source?

carefreewannabe:


Were you too emotional to put your arguments forward without repeatedly insulting me?

Interesting.

No need to use google.

It is enough to compare your responses with mine to see that you are unable to control your emotions.

Brain Facts To Know And Share: Men Have A Lower Percentage Of Gray Matter Than Women

http://www.medicaldaily.com/brain-facts-know-and-share-men-have-lower-percentage-gray-matter-women-292530

Does this source explain why you can only rely on one source?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050121100142.htm

http://www.mindupdate.com/2007/07/men-think-using-grey-matter-women-with-white/

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6849058/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/genders-really-do-think-differently/

m.livescience.com/3808-men-women-differently.html

science.howstuffworks.com/life/men-women-different-brains1.htm


This is the person who authored that source of yours:

Susan Scutti works as a reporter for Medical Daily and contributes on occasion to Newsweek magazine. She also writes novels. Her stories, poems, and reviews have been published in The Christian Science Monitor, New York Quarterly, Philadelphia Review of Books, Sensitive Skin, and other journals and anthologies. She graduated from Yale, later earned a Master's from CUNY. Generally, she prefers dogs to cats.

Susan Scutti is an American fiction writer, poet and journalist currently writing for Newsweek and Medical Daily.

As for the things you interpreted as insults, call it full disclosure - free of charge.
Someone was bound to tell you sooner than later.

crackhaus:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050121100142.htm

http://www.mindupdate.com/2007/07/men-think-using-grey-matter-women-with-white/

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6849058/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/genders-really-do-think-differently/

m.livescience.com/3808-men-women-differently.html

science.howstuffworks.com/life/men-women-different-brains1.htm


This is the person who authored that source of yours:



As for the things you interpreted as insults, call it full disclosure - free of charge.
Someone was bound to tell you sooner than later.

So now you quote different sources but still reject to check those that contradict you? Interesting.



No need for any disclosure free of charge. I live in a country with a very good health system.

I was checked thoroughly before I was allowed to carry all the responsibility I do before I signed my employment agreement.
Maybe you need some check up or better anger management training.

carefreewannabe:


So now you quote different sources but still reject to check those that contradict you? Interesting.



No need for any disclosure free of charge. I live in a country with a very good health system.

I was checked thoroughly before I was allowed to carry all the responsibility I do before I signed my employment agreement.
Maybe you need some check up or better anger management training.

I quoted other sources to reply that bit about relying on one source (whatever it was you were trying to say) - you don't have to check them either.

I think I prefer training on impatience management.

crackhaus:

I quoted other sources to reply that bit about relying on one source (whatever it was you were trying to say) - you don't have to check them either.

I think I prefer training on impatience management.

And politeness.

carefreewannabe:


And politeness.

As long as you're coming with.