I've nothing of value to add to this discussion, which should surprise no one. Yet I can't help but think of the Kipling line:
A woman is just a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke.
If we grant he meant to place the cigar in a superior position, and if we (as mostly men upon this board) also grant that women are complex, does is follow that the cigar gains its alleged superiority not only from its unspeaking loyalty but from its consistency and lack of complexity?
No doubt my logic is flawed, as it stems from my fevered brain.