Gender and Discourse - Essay Example

Gender and Discourse Communication refers to the ways in which individuals spread information and ideas. It is clear that people apply communication techniques in expressing feelings, opinions, values, and emotions. Thus, communication is vital for human interaction in different social platforms. Given that individual aspects such as gender have significant influence on interpersonal skills, the characteristics and diversity of those involved in any interaction can affect communication. In her Gender and Discourse, Deborah Tannen explores the expression of interpersonal relationships in the course of conversational interaction. The author has analyzed conversational style and interaction differences at numerous levels, and in relation to different situations. Largely, Tannen explores the two fundamental elements that created integrated coherence in any given conversation. These two elements are the topical cohesion and physical alignment. Physical alignment entails the positions that individuals adopt during conversations. This might involve things such as how people sit in relative positions to their audience when talking, as well as the maintenance of eye gaze (Tannen, 1994). On the other hand, topical cohesion entails ways in which people introduce and develop their topics in respect to their manner of talking or that of their colleagues. From the study analyzed by Tannen, it is noteworthy that the variation between boys and girls could be staggering or startling in terms of how the individuals handle their topical coherence or manage their body alignment. As in many such conversations, females often sit still, facing one another, with occasional glances and touching each other now and then. On the other hand, males are usually very restless as seen in their fidgety movements, as well as eye gaze. Older males tend to remain more in their physical appearance. However, they are more likely to spreads out in their chairs rather than gathering themselves within the space that they occupy (Tannen, 1994). Furthermore, males do not often face each other during conversations and do not fix their gaze on their partners. When it comes to the topical cohesion, the analysis conducted by Tannen confirms earlier research studies that indicated that males encounter many difficulties in adapting themselves to the experimental conditions of sitting in composure and discussing important topics. By observing the aspects of emergency coherence (topical coherence and physical alignment) among males and females of similar age, it is notable that there exist some gender-specific conversational styles. Even in today’s social environment, these patterns tend to remain relatively constant in all ages. For instance, in a recent group discussion on a personal development topic, it was noted that female members from different age brackets sat closely together, and at times seemed to align their bodies towards each other. When it came to the expression of opinion on several issues during the discussion, it was noted that most females displayed good eye contact, only showing a few occasional breaks in gaze. When time came for the male group members to present their views on different topics, most of them appeared to sit at inclined angles to the person who was moderating the discussion. By looking at some of the differences noted in the discussion above, one could make the conclusion that the female contributors were more interested and engaged in the topics being discussed during the forum. This is mainly due to the conventional belief that good eye contact in conversations signals a deep level of engagement with the topic of interest. On the other hand, failure to maintain a constant gaze, coupled with some forms of more relaxed sitting posture often signals a sense of non-interest. Given the fact that eye-gaze demonstrates the interlocutor’s center of attention, it can be said that eye-gaze is an important signal when it comes to measures of conversational activity. For the female participants, the eye-gaze may be indicative of their keen concentration on the topic under discussion. Furthermore, maintaining constant eye contact demonstrates that a person is more willing to make a positive contribution to the discussion forum. This might another of Tannen’s observation that female participants were more likely to extrapolate fewer topics into lengthy and meaningful discussions (Tannen, 1994). The fact that the girls and young women maintained calm composure and straight eye-gaze is indicative of their keenness in making as much contribution as possible to the topics under discussion. On the other hand, boys and young men seemed a bit unsettled, with roaming eye-gaze, and with little attention to the topic under discussion. As a result, the male participants could only manage to give a shallow contribution to a wide range of topics.   When analyzing these differences, it is clear that Tannen does not take a judgmental viewpoint. In fact, she does not explicitly assert that girls and women were more involved in the discussion forum than their male counterparts. Instead, she presents the argument that both male and female participants had equal involvement in the discussion, only that they portrayed varying cultural patterns for demonstrating their involvement. This creates the illusion that the male-female differences noted in interpersonal conversations are because of cultural differences between the two groups of participants. For example, straight eye-gaze by men is often regarded as a sign of aggression. On the other hand, women are expected to display a high level of emotional attachment, and hence, the need to maintain a focused eye-gaze to their audience. The bottom-line is that both males and females achieve meaningful levels of conversational coherence, and the fact that they accomplish this in different ways results from the cultural variations between the two groups (Tannen, 1994). When one fails to understand the fact that conversational coherence is depicted in different ways between males and females. Then, one is likely to make negative conclusions regarding the ability of either gender to make a meaningful contribution to any given conversation. For instance, when one takes the example of a classroom set-up, it is noteworthy that boys and young men are more likely to be restless and demonstrate a higher level of fidgety movements. As a result, the teacher is highly likely to interpret such behavior as a form of non-concentration about the topic being taught, or whatever discussion may be taking place in the class. On the other hand, female students often maintain straight eye contact with the teacher, with little movements. As a result, the teacher may interpret such behavior as a form of increased interest in the subject being taught or a high level of concentration on the discussion topic. When gender variations are considered in the concept of a cross-cultural framework, the analysis of the lack of physical alignment and eye contact as a form of disengagement and lack of focus may reinforce the female’s away from conversational engagement as the norm. However, going by the concept of cultural differences, it is noteworthy that there are cultures that do not expect males and females to act any different than they do during normal conversations. As noted by Tannen, some cultures expect the participants to show respect by casting their eyes away from their audience. Thus, the lack of straight and constant eye-gaze cannot be regarded as a sign of non-engagement. When it comes to topical coherence, females demonstrate little difficulty in coming up with an interesting topic in which they can make meaningful contributions. However, males show a lot of difficulty in finding an interesting topic in which they can start brainstorming. As a result, boys and young men tend to make little contributions to a variety of topics as compared to their female counterparts who are more likely to make longer and more interactive deliberations of few topics. Taking the case study of the personal development forum, it was noted that female participants were fast in coming up with several interesting topics that the group could deliberate. For instance, Mary proposed the topic on career development, and discussion on the topic lasted for more than two hours. To say the least, contributions of the female participants to this particular topic could not be exhausted even after the two hours. In another group composed of male participants. There were a number of great topics that were proposed, including, career development, financial management, relationships, work-study balance, and many more. However, it was noted that none of the topics was explored in substantial detail. Rather, the members only made little contributions to each of the topics proposed. References Tannen, D. (1994). Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press Read More