Among the more egregious examples of modern sexism is the notion that women are irrational. Apparently this notion is still commonly-enough held to be stated and debated across the internet. I argue that accusations of irrationality are problematic in two ways: (1) they are based on a misunderstanding of the role of emotions in effective living and (2) they constitute a refusal to understand others' subjective realities, an understanding that is crucial to effective relationship-building and conflict resolution. I will discuss each of these problems below.
A misunderstanding of emotions
The idea that women are irrational is often paired with a notion that rational thought is superior to emotion, that reason leads to sound decisions and emotion leads to poor ones. This could not be further from the truth; research has shown that not only do people not make better decisions when they aren't emotionally engaged; without emotions, people cannot make decisions at all. Thus, emotions are fundamental to effective action.
Philosopher Martha Nussbaum has written about emotions as forms of intelligent thought, evaluations of the status of one's current life in light of one's goals. In this perspective, positive emotions show us that things are working well for us and negative emotions show us that something is amiss in our lives. This kind of information is a critical guide to effective living.
This is in contrast to a popular view of emotions as messy, difficult, and disruptive; as such, they they should be kept under control. With this mindset, many people lack willingness to explore their own feelings or those of others, and thus have little understanding of their own or others' emotional processes. Our society particularly deprives men of opportunities for emotional expressiveness and understanding.
The "irrational" label as a refusal to understand another's reality
Typically, what people mean by "irrational" behavior is a demonstration of strong emotion in a situation in which the observer does not understand why such strong emotion is warranted. Yet just because the observer doesn't understand the emotion doesn't mean that is doesn't have a perfectly reasonable explanation. The "irrational" label too often justifies and maintains ignorance, as it implies that the behavior is a product of such a fundamentally broken or flawed person that it defies - and fails to even deserve - the understanding of anyone who is reasonable.
Romantic relationships are an arena where emotions run wild, as do misunderstandings of emotions and attendant accusations of irrationality. Romantic relationships pull for strong emotions because they are attachment relationships. Like children, adults rely on attachment relationships for comfort, security, and love. Moment-to-moment awareness of and responsiveness to each other's needs are the stuff of secure connections between partners. When one partner feels that the security of the relationship is threatened (e.g., by behavior that is dismissive or conveys indifference), he or she may respond with strong emotions - loneliness, anger, grief, and disappointment. These predictable responses, if felt and expressed vehemently enough, seem irrational indeed.
Emotional upheavals are intelligent signals about the course of one's life and the status of one's most important relationships. To invalidate another's emotional experience by accusing him or her of being "irrational" is equivalent to denying that person's right to self-determination. To buy into a concept of ourselves as "irrational" is to invalidate our own emotional experience, and to miss the benefits that our emotions offer as guides to creating a good life.
