The simplest way to define differences in gender-based irrationality (whether culturally instilled or nature) can be summed up in one word: "ego".
"Ego" is by nature the truest form of subjectivity because it values the self over the external world. The ability to comprehend and deal with what happens externally is what objectivity is, while being limited to comprehending only the Self is ego. I don't personally think this is innate to gender, but society accepts and defines the "male ego" while the term the "female ego" is rarely mentioned. There are egotistical women for certain, and just like the case with either gender it does make a person capable of more irrationality. To whatever extent a society accepts the "male ego" (or "female ego") as legitimizing an action, is the same extent it accepts irrationality in that same context.
I am interested to hear arguments to the contrary.
What's interesting is that we hear more about the male ego, and numbers of men who are narcissists is higher than women who are diagnosed as narcissists.
However, I think this may be partly due to socialization, as apparently there have been more cases of female narcissism since girls have slowly been granted equal esteem and pressure to perform as their brothers.
Men are still more likely to be narcissists, though. They're also more likely to be sociopaths.
Narcissism is a personality disorder that is largely nurture, due to putting undue pressure on a child to perform externally, being harsh with them and even abusive, causing them to believe they have to achieve externals to be loved. Which is sad. But wait...there's more. The other side to the parental style that creates the narcissist is giving the little narcissist a sense of entitlement that he or she is somehow better than others or exempt in some inexplicable way.
So apparently societies have been traditionally more likely to give boys this sense of inexplicable, irrational entitlement, but there have slowly been more female narcissists since gender roles are changing.
Sociopaths, on the other hand, are a lot more nature than nurture, they are incapable of empathy, and well over 90% are men.
So while I agree men are apparently more likely to lack empathy, either as nurtured narcissists or socipaths, I am not so sure that means they are more "rational." Especially since Ti, Te, Fi and Fe are all rational functions.
I think men and women are probably equally irrational, just in different biological ways.
Also, even if someone attempts to make the argument that women would be more likely to do something crazy out of emotion, does that really make it any better than men are more likely to be cold-blooded killers? I mean killing is killing right? (And men are more likely to kill, in general).
This whole thread pretty much sickens me, but I felt like your posts deserved more acknowledgement than some bratty, emotional dismissal.