Unfortunately, put down, knee jerk expressions, such as: "men are emotional Neanderthals" or the just-as-dismissive "her hormones are talking." are hardly rare impolite society, till humor and boorish contempt aside, it would be well to consider the possibility that thinking and feeling are supportive gateways to the other.

After all, aren't all feelings and emotions, as well as remembrances from our earliest age, rooted in life experience? Does not thinking give us the power to interpret experience and memory, whether happy or painful? Why draw sharp distinctions between the value of these two instinctive methods for looking at the universe around us? Why denigrate one or the other in our between-the-sexes contretemps?

In truth, some of us are inclined to be cognitive.

Others tend, more distinctly, emotional, expressive behavior. Let us not draw false conclusions from these observations. No strict rule of thumb should be ascribed to either of these responses as being strictly "male" or "female" oriented behavior or, more importantly, that one way of formulating conclusions is superior to the other.

We expect the mathematician to be cognitive, the opera singer to be gloriously emotional. Typically, these characterizations generate no discomfort when ever aired. They are perfectly acceptable as being in the natural order of things.Why the antipathy then, when seen in a male vs, female context?

Sometimes I think about contrasting points of view as a right vs. left hand dichotomy. Are they the same or opposite? They can move seamlessly in the same or opposite direction. They are best when they operate together, when they embrace, caress, or grasp an object. Abetted by the aid of the human eye.

Add the mind and heart to this equation, what have we then? Quite simply, magnificent, multi dimensional performance that can create beautiful music, save lives on the operating table, express love for another and hundreds of other meaningful activities. No polar opposites here, only harmony between two highly evolved collaborative instruments of the human body.

Is the above lesson of harmonious opposites adaptable to the creation of natural, open-minded, spirited conversation, benefiting from the respective powers of observation from both sides of the table ,rather than off-putting male vs. female analysis and misleading labeling? One hopes so.

The world would be better for it and peace between the sexes more abundant.

by Dr. J. Leff