Differences in Communication Styles Between the Genders - Essay Example

Differences in Communication Styles Between the Genders In her book You Just Don’t Understand, Deborah Tannen attempts to teach us that communicationis much more than syntax and grammar, especially in regards to conversations between men and women. She underscores the importance of the ways in which people use language as a means to express themselves from the deepest levels of their being whenever they say anything. Speaking is not just words she tells us. There is a vast complexity to our interactions that involves the unspoken intent of the speaker, the emotions that are purposefully or subconsciously added to the words, and the emotional response that the words evoke from the listener. There are distinct and predictable differences between the ways that men and women communicate. It is all a matter of speaking style and preferences. Biological function is the basis for these differences. Men engage the world “as an individual in a hierarchical social order in which he was either one up or one down” (Tannen 24). Tannen says that life for men, “is a contest, a struggle to preserve independence and avoid failure” (25). Women on the other hand approach the world “as an individual in a network of connections” where “conversations are negotiations for closeness” (Tannen 25). Women then see life as “a community, a struggle to preserve intimacy and avoid isolation” (Tannen 25). If there is not the recognition and acknowledgement that these differences exist, then the only possible outcome is a world of misunderstanding between the sexes. These opposing world views described by Tannen become the context to the speaker’s words, purposes and intent. She describes some the interactions that could potentially develop within each of these two paradigms and between them through a series of “Asymmetries” that we typically encounter in the course of daily living. When one person could be considered to hold a favorable position compared to someone else, this can be seen as a type of asymmetry in the balance of power. Someone needs a sympathetic ear, and the other has the responsibility of offering support. Another kind of asymmetry occurs when a simple chore becomes flavored by the underlying currents which govern male and female behavior. Asking for directions while driving in the car is a classic example that demonstrates the differences between the way men think and the way women think. In the book, we are given the scenario of Sybil and Harold lost while on the road in a car. Sybil is angry that Harold will not stop and ask for directions. From her perspective, asking for help “reinforces bonds between people” (Tannen 63). If she was driving then there would be no question of asking for directions, it would have been accomplished without hesitation. Harold has a different perspective on asking someone for directions however. Men do not ask for help because “one who has more information is framed as higher up on the ladder” (Tannen 62). Therefore “finding one’s own way is an essential part of the independence that men perceive to be a prerequisite for self-respect” (Tannen 62). Because both Sybil and Harold are coming only from their individual perspective, there is no common ground in this situation and much stress is created within their lives together. Presumably if one or the other was able to see things from a different point of view, then that would lead to feelings of being grounded and secure within the relationship for both individuals. Men and women talk about different things and use their talking for different purposes. In public it is the man who feels the most comfortable doing all of the talking in order to demonstrate his knowledge and get attention from his audience. At home the woman is more likely to feel comfortable talking about passing thoughts in order to build rapport. Sharing secrets and intimate details of daily life is a way that women strengthen the intimacy of their relationships. This is not as important for men who usually remain silent rather than speak about their feelings and thoughts. Men often take the opportunity to present the factual information they hold to an appreciative female listener, but the opposite case is rarely observed. Tannen says that “since women seek to build rapport, they are inclined to play down their expertise rather than display it” (125). Whereas “men value the position of center stage and the feeling of knowing more, they seek opportunities to gather and disseminate factual information” (Tannen 125). Presumably the one who is privy to specialized information is in the seat of power and the listener who does not have the information is one step lower. This is the type of imbalance that motivates men to start talking. Knowledge alone is not enough to bring balance back to spoken conversations between men and women. When there are two men talking and one of them clearly has more experience in a given field, then it is expected that the lesser man will defer to the other’s greater expertise. This means that the expert man will talk for a longer period of time and his words will carry more weight. One is the lecturer and the other is the student. But still the lesser man will save face by challenging the authority of his opponent. He does not sit by passively but instead develops retorts and questions for the other speaker. This is a normal and expected component of conversations between men. When a woman expert enters the arena the dynamic can change considerably. A woman might expect that her superior knowledge is sufficient to gain the upper hand in a conversation with a man. What she might not expect is that the man will treat her as an equal and challenge her authority. Tannen tells us that “habitual ways of talking are hard to change" and that “mutual acceptance will at least prevent the pain of being told you are doing something wrong when you are only doing things your way” (122). At its deepest level Tanner’s book is a call for change in the way that men and women typically engage in conversation. She asks us all to approach our relationships with greater sensitivity by understanding that men and women are coming from different places. By taking these factors into account it may be possible to improve the quality of life for all parties involved. There are some things that I agree with in Deborah Tannen’s book. Definitely there is a difference between how men communicate and how women communicate. Men and women think differently. They act differently. They have different body chemistries. They’ve played different roles in society across the ages. Their hormones are different. So why shouldn’t they have different styles of speaking as well? From a biochemical perspective, men normally possess higher levels of testosterone in their body. Testosterone makes people aggressive and builds muscles. On the other hand, women hold a higher level of estrogen and progesterone in their tissues. Progesterone and estrogen prepare a woman to be a mother. They put her in a nurturing state of mind, and enlarge the mammary glands to prepare for giving milk. It makes sense that these physiological differences should give rise to contrasting ways of communicating. It is important to keep in mind that these are broad generalizations though. Not every man has an overabundance of masculine traits and not every woman is ready to be a mother. There is much undefined territory between the two extremes. I think that Tannen is talking more about society as a whole rather than concentrating on any particular individual. She uses case studies than involve two people, but they are meant to represent something larger. The numerous examples that are given in the book are meant to illustrate a vast overriding principle more than any single scenario. The next point that I agree with is that there exist stereotypical patterns of behavior that could be classified either as “the way that men do things” or “the way that women do things” (Stereotypes of Women in Management, 2009). Certainly men and women have been getting together in the world for a long time. Each sex as a group have accepted and believed certain ideas about themselves. The roles that people play in the world develop out of these definitions that people have made for themselves. It is no surprise that patterns have developed in the ways that each sex handles their day-to-day affairs. Some of the roles we play are gender neutral while others are strongly biased towards one sex. We can easily recognize when someone is acting like a man or acting like a woman regardless of their biological gender. Men go off and fight wars, men go to work every day and bring home the bacon, men are the disciplinarians. Women are homemakers, women raise the children, and women are the nurturers. So when we hear that some family is doing things differently and dad is staying home to watch the children while mom goes to work, it provokes a reaction from the society at large. Many of our beliefs that we hold as a society are in the form of unspoken assumptions. It is assumed without discussion that the husband is the one who works and the wife stays home and cares for the children. The same thing happens in communication between men and women. There are male speaking styles that have developed and uniquely female speaking styles that have developed. Finally, I agree with Tannen’s description of the inequality between the way men are treated and the way women are treated (Sex Differences Scientific, 2005). Our society readily accepts the way men speak as the correct way and that all other ways of speaking are not as good. Over the past several thousand years women have been subjugated by the patriarchal powers of the church and state. All things feminine have been automatically judged and condemned as inferior to their male counterparts. This has been particularly true with language and communication as Tannen explains to us. An underlying current in the book is this novel idea that men and women are different but equal. In the past these differences have been used as a way to judge and diminish the power of women, but in our modern era this no longer needs to be the case (Mindrelief, 2007). Women’s words are just as important as men’s words, and probably more important in a number of ways. Tannen advocates a return to equality and balance in our social interactions with the opposite sex. Nowhere is this more important than in the relationship we share with our mate. If there is going to be any change happening in our communities, it needs to begin at the level of the intimate partnership. Works Cited Mindrelief. Gender Issues in Languages (2007). Referenced 25 April 2009 “Sex Differences Scientific.” The Washington Times Online 16 February 2005 Stereotypes of Women in Management (2009). Referenced 25 April 2009 Tannen, Deborah. You Just Don’t Understand. New York: Ballantine, 1990. Read More