This is a very well written article. However, I must admit I don't really understand the wide interest the (western) world seems to have in the men vs women vie

This is a very well written article. However, I must admit I don't really understand the wide interest the (western) world seems to have in the men vs women viewpoints. Perhaps (and I'm just guessing here), it is because the culture in the west has changed so fast that men and women are struggling to find new "places" in society. I don't know - it's just a guess. I'm going to pick on one point to discuss - the WAW effect (Women are Wonderful). >Both men and women hold much more favorable views of women than of men. Almost everybody likes women better than men. leading to: >perhaps nature designed women to seek to be lovable, whereas men were designed to strive, mostly unsuccessfully, for greatness. Sounds reasonable until you see he has skipped over the middle: >It was not always thus. Up until about the 1960s, psychology (like society) tended to see men as the norm and women as the slightly inferior version. During the 1970s, there was a brief period of saying there were no real differences, just stereotypes. Only since about 1980 has the dominant view been that women are better and men are the inferior version. It seems strange to draw such broad conclusions that completely ignore the past in favour of present circumstance. Plus I can tell you, in India the bias is more towards liking men than women. In any case, I wish I understood the fascination the west has with men vs women debates. The fact that men and women are different is obvious as is the fact that they tend to complement each other. The fact that men and women are similar is also obvious as is the fact that they tend to compete with each other. So what??!