I absolutely love this comic from Robot Hugs! Yes, people are people! Or, as Kathryn Dindia once said, “Men are from North Dakota, women are from South Dakota.”
Aw, I love Robot Hugs! It's great to see it getting some publicity here. Also, YES.
Also also, anyone who has ever participated in a feminist discussion online really needs to read this one:http://www.robot-hugs.com/but-men/
People vary on the extent to which they believe they "own" or have most of the responsibility for their own emotions. People are also inconsistent in this regard, understanding their responsibility in some circumstances but not in others, and can vary in this understanding over time.
This complicates communications between men and between women as well.
The "war between the sexes" may be a popular referent for communications problems but it is not necessary for the study of underlying causes in my opinion.
[…] This is spot on. We’ve been told that men and women communicate differently….so that makes it harder to understand one another. Women have been promoted as a group instead of a collection of individuals with independent thought. […]
if people are convinced that communication is gendered, and they
replicate the expectations of their gender and perceive the proposed
differences in the other genders... then wouldn't that mean that
regardless of what might occur in a vacuum, communication ends up being
gendered anyway? Gender.
We're all like the same... but different. Individuals but also like a community, man, of people.
There is gender bias in our language though, and how women and men communicate is both psychologically and sociologically proven to be true. Women and men in each culture use body language, intonation, and linguistic tricks differently to impart different meaning and connotation to what they say. Yes all people are unique and yes each person is complex; these facts don't detract from the established understanding of high level differences between men and women and how they communicate. Gendered linguistics is crucial actually to understanding how our languages developed.
I think the problem here is that the comic and therein the writers don't differentiate between valid gendered linguistic traits in a language and the culturally established stereotypes that surround gendered linguistic systems. These stereotypes tend to oversimplify an otherwise complex language system.
Stereotypically it's something like: If a man says no he means no, if a woman says no she could mean: maybe, no, yes, I'm still thinking about it, etc.
This type of stereotype does cause problems in our understanding of the linguistic thought. But if looked at correctly it does show something important to our language. Men, statistically speaking, are quick to speak snap judgement speakers. Women on the other hand, statistically, are long thought processors. So when something is said, it's intended connotative meaning may not fit completely if not at all to the end thought.
Body language also reflects this. Men, especially confident men, tend to exert a very rigid body language that doesn't deviate, even when contemplation is occurring, in stark contrast, woman tend to outwardly show their emotions and thought processes through body language.
Many researchers believe this is because of our earlier hunting gathering predecessors. Emotional body language is easy to read even at a distance. The woman, who stayed in the village or gathered in groups communicated with their body language faster than those who spoke. This is a remnant of our pre-language community.
Men, traditionally the hunter group had to make snap decisions and that is reflected in our body language and vocal languages. These vestiges of our evolutionary ancestors is still used today, though for often very different ways.
Now does this make any person's opinion or voice any less important than another's? No. Does it mean that men and women have an issue with communication? Well yes, men who are used to being with men, understand the intersocial communication structure they grew up with and natural exert. The same go for women and other women. But put the two groups together and communication becomes problematic because the cues each group uses aren't inherently known by the opposing gender.
You'll note that boys who group up with a single mom or with sisters tend to understand the female cues more readily than a male who group up surrounded only by men. The vice versa is true of girls and brothers. Gay persons tend to have issues here too, Because of the fact that language is partially instinctual (especially body language) but it's also culturally instilled and conditioned. Because of the other issues that surround homosexuality from a cultural perspective linguistic cues and social conditioning is different for LGBTQ. Rejection and disenfranchisement tend to lead to stunted linguistic development and the ability to read and understand body language.
Overall gendered language is a very real thing. It shouldn't be construed to mean that any gender is stereotypically disingenuous in what they say. But it should be accepted as fact and utilized to explore and understand the reasons why communications between the sexes can be difficult.
This was obviously written by someone who has never been told, "Fine."
I wish this comic were real. Sadly, it's bullshit.
Is this comic being intentionally ironic when it stereotypes men as being ignorant and sexist?
Or is it just ignorant and sexist?
Seriously, though, bitches be needing to keeping it real.
I like the huge lecture because he asks "What does she mean when she says-" without even hearing the end of the question. Clearly inquiring into meaning of his girlfriend's statements can only be a sign that he's bowing to the all-oppressive patriarchy, and is a clear sign of the ever-present marginalization of women.
Or he was just asking a goddamned question.
This comic is fantastically stupid, and is pretentious as hell.
[…] Men and Women! They Talk Like People! » Sociological Images. […]
ok ok, I think it's obvious that the point of this comic is not about setting up a believable context for this conversation. The point is obviously the rant. Can you think of a situation in which it would be warranted? Yes? That is what you are supposed to do. Now the content! Better communication would be great! It would be great for women especially because along with many other potential causes for confusion when communicating, women have stereotypes that cause confusion as well.
If that makes you uncomfortable, pay close attention to your communication and look at how fitting in gender roles could be making it harder to understand one another.
[…] I have no idea. […]
Comments made here aren't enough to understand people have different opinions and truth not necessarily is only one?
Your email address will not be published.
Sociological Images encourages people to exercise and develop their sociological imaginations with discussions of compelling visuals that span the breadth of sociological inquiry. Read more…
CC Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike