Not to mention that emotionally intelligent is somewhat of an insulting term. Men and women deal with and express emotions in radically different ways, that doesn't make one way more mature or intelligent.
With this statement, I think you are coming from a place of cultural bias. I find that men and women are more alike than "radically different" with emotions, with similar emotional needs and wants (perhaps to different degrees, but there is much variation within gender, I feel). However, in some societies, how they are allowed to recognize, validate, and meet those needs and wants are strongly shaped and regulated. For example, in Roman society, a woman who would want fame and prestige from being seen as virtuous would try to become a Vestal, or show extreme fidelity to a husband publicly. Today, a surer route to fame and prestige will look very different.
I don't think you know what is being meant here by emotionally intelligent. An abusive person who cannot control their anger, or someone who abuses alcohol to cope with their feelings in a detrimental way is an example of someone who is not emotionally intelligent. A person who can, most of the time, empathize with you, and can give and accept help and advice based on your goals putting you first (and explicate and communicate situations wherein they have to prioritize themselves or someone else), and knows their own goals and emotions and what they need, are some of the traits and behaviors of what people refer to as an emotionally intelligent person. Sometimes you see the term emotionally mature, which means the same thing.
I've been seeing someone now for just shy of 2 years and I've really noticed how much differently I approach things now. Obviously not perfect, but things I simply didn't understand or know how to deal with constructively in the past seem at least familiar now. Essentially, I have a clue now.
This isn't an "end state" but rather a process of learning and developing that continues - but has gotten to a point where I feel like a much better partner than I probably was in the past. I didn't have terribly great role models to emulate in this regard and I wasn't born knowing how to participate in a romantic relationship. But I've at least had some experience in what can work, what doesn't work well, and where I need to focus to avoid mistakes I've made or others could've handled better.
I mean, my relationship history is approximately similar, and I’ve got to say:
This qualifies me to give approximately zero relationship advice, and has gained me approximately zero insight in to the human condition.
I'm not sure I follow how that's insulting.
You can frame it how you want. It can also be projected as a strength (emotional control). Or men simply being less interested in exchanging emotions intensely as it's just not that important to them.
I would consider the possibility of BPD. This is kind of a hallmark symptom.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disor...
Point being: I’ve known men who are “stoic” in this way and emotionally stable because they don’t otherwise have mental health issues.
There is simply no evidence to support the idea that women are better at coping with psychological distress, or that men would benefit from adopting stereotypically female coping strategies.
Men are diagnosed significantly lower, not experience.
To bring this down to a real world meme-like example: my girlfriend can fill a solid hour every day discussing her work day and in particular developments in her dealings with colleagues.
I struggle to fill a minute. I'm not suppressing anything, there's simply not much there as it comes to work.
These are just differences, nothing wrong with it.
It's possible to be emotional and out of touch.
It's possible to be stoic and receptive.
She also has no emotional control and is likely to bite you, or bawl on the floor crying when she doesn't get her way.
I've heard a lot about men needing to be more expressive and open about their inner emotional state, but I've never heard people mention stoicism in the same context or that stoicism necessarily leads to the opposite of that.
Or that stoicism is associated with being unintelligent, primitive or underdeveloped.
Have you heard it from your circle in a social setting? I'm curious where you heard such sentiments.
I’m not particularly familiar but I understand this “stoicism” is not really the Stoicism one might read about on wikipedia (maybe related but ultimately not congruent). In a practical sense, when people say “more expressive and open” they are necessarily talking about the opposite of this “stoicism”.
This “more expressive and open” is also often expressed as “more emotionally intelligent” and that’s insulting to the emotional intelligence of such “stoics”. It’s very literally “they don’t express themselves correctly” and I can’t imagine someone not being insulted by such a claim of their personality.