Okay, let's see if I can phrase this to catch what I mean, and still get it across well....
Most of the intelligent women I know seem to have the diverse sides more integrated, especially that between intellect and instinct. So much so that they may not even understand themselves their reasons for their reactions. It isn't just instinct, it's reasoning done so unconsciously -- and with amazing speed -- that it appears an instinctual reaction. However, if you can probe enough, you'll usually find there's a lot of thought below the surface aspect of the mind, but it's so integrated with the emotions and instincts that it appears to be almost without thought. That's when they "feel" this or that way about something -- they've actually calculated the factors, but in a way quite different from men, which is usually more deliberative and conscious. Because of this integration, there's no division allowed in the mind when they take action -- certainly not in a crisis situation. (I realize this is an extreme generalization, not to mention based greatly on personal experience; but it seems backed up by others' experiences a great deal, as well.) So it becomes "no-holds-barred", in such a case; reservations go to the wall. If they act less severely, it's because, on some level, they've recognized a need for a less drastic action. Otherwise, the reaction is total and uncompromising. (This also, by the way, makes for very speedy reflex action -- cf. Heinlein's female pilots in
Starship Troopers.)
Now, that's
intelligent women. Those who are not -- those who don't particularly use their intellect any more than they must -- don't seem to function quite this way, and as that tends to be the majority of either men or women, what happens is that the thinking is muddy and fragmented, and they react more on an emotional level, but often without any real emotional maturity. Men do this as well, just in a different way. With men, it tends to be an unthinking "alpha-male" syndrome, with women, it seem to result in a dichotomy where they want the independence of action, yet still want to have that gallant shield when things backfire. So, in that way, such women are a lot like spoilt children: they expect the world to go their way and, when it doesn't, they toss a snit.
Those who are more intelligent and more independent, on the other hand, are quite capable of taking it on the chin, even when it's the sort of thing that would cripple most men, I think. That may be because, in most cultures, men have been socialized to put layers between themselves and their emotions, so they really don't quite know how to handle it when something truly emotionally devastating comes along and blows things up. The type of women I'm talking about, being more integrated, seem to have a tensile emotional strength that is quite amazing... but that means they are, to use a Heinleinian phrase, "heap bad medicine" once you get on their bad side.
And, to be honest, I'd say there is a biological component: the instinct not only for self-preservation, but for preservation of offspring. This isn't strictly limited to genuine offspring, either... it often spills over onto those they care about and who, for whatever reason, are (temporarily) at a disadvantage and threatened... then they'll fight like an enraged sabre-tooth to protect them, verbally or physically. Men (thank goodness) do have a fair amount of that, too... but I think to a slightly lesser degree than women.
