A story in Newsweek reports on a recent psychological experiment where participants were shown photos of women's and men's faces looking sad, afraid, angry or disgusted, with a sentence beneath each image purporting to explain the emotion, such as "buried a family pet" for a sad face, or "was threatened by an attacker" for a fearful one. The participants offered starkly different explanations for the emotions, saying that the women were "emotional" while the men were "having a bad day" even when the expressions and explanations were identical. So while the men were perceived to have a feeling because of context, women were perceived to be temperamental or have an emotional nature.
Women are often touted as the more emotional sex, and it's not considered a positive thing. But the scientific evidence to support that theory is skimpy. This study concluded "The stereotype of the overly emotional female is grounded in the belief that women express emotion because they are emotional creatures, but men express emotion because the situation warrants it. Regardless of whether women are objectively more emotionally expressive, people attribute their emotional behaviors to a more emotional nature."
This annoys me because I've actually been told in the past by a boss [who I couldn't stand] that I am "too emotional." I describe myself as passionate, and wouldn't you want someone who is passionate about what they do rather than someone who doesn't give a damn?