That's what a sociological theory means, you dolt - that it's a pervasive dynamic - not that it applies to every last person in the culture. And getting emotional in a debate is quite often a sign of frustration that the other person's has no ability for actual rational substantive discourse which is what I prefer - and what is totally going on here. My frustration is 100% about you and your complete inability to absorb things that I've told to you 6 or 7 times already. You have no capacity for rational thought - only lashing out from pure emotion, which is ironically what men who disavow the importance of emotion often do so that it runs them like a puppet master from behind the scenes.

https://medium.com/inside-of-elle-beau/why-are-men-so-much-more-emotional-than-women-76466c72acb1

"People who have no real access to their emotional landscape are destined to be run by those very emotions from behind the scenes, like a puppet master pulling strings. They react, rather than respond and otherwise lash out at things that poke at their sore spots without even quite knowing why. Conversely, people who have fluency with their emotional landscape are able to better understand why they do what they do and to use that knowledge to help shape their lives and destinies. They are actually more in control of themselves than people who stuff and sublimate every emotion, only to have those seep through or explode in times of stress."