Much of the attention of the media has been directed to the notion that men and women communicate in different ways. Sometimes, it is imagined that men and women communicate quite differently from each other that one could imagine that they come from different planets—an idea expressed in John Gray’s publication, Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus. As much as the variations in the communications of women and men appear to be overwhelming and constant, they are minor. For instance, it should be understood that both genders can be sentimental, task-focused, aggressive, and nurturing. Nevertheless, what is critical to consider is that men and women at times perceive the same messages as having different meanings. It could be the result of the variations in the interpretations of messages by the two sexes that the battle for sexes happens.
In trying to justify the premise of the battle for the sexes, this paper first reviews the exiting studies on the contributions of gender to the styles of communication. The paper further uses examples—which are hypothetical—to justify and elaborate the primary ideas developed from the reviewed literature (the examples indicate the possible misunderstandings that might results in the communications between men and women—the two of them taken to represent gender for the absence of literature on other sexual orientations, such as LGBTQQ, in relation to the topic). Lastly, because the differences in the styles of communication between men and women often result in misunderstandings, it is imperative discussing the approaches that could be adopted to solve the misunderstandings, as this paper does.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Differences in the Styles of Communication
Literature indicates that women, to a greater degree than do the men, pay attention to interpersonal meanings existing between the lines in the communications in which they engage with their mates. For instance, according to Wood (2009), societal expectations usually make women more responsible for the regulation of intimacy or the level to which they allow others to come close than they do for the men. Consequently, it has been argued in existing studies on the topic that women are more sensitive compared to the men to underlying meanings in intimacy in communications (Tannen, 2013). Contrarily, the same cited literature suggests that men, to a greater degree than do the women, are sensitive to the between the lines meanings of communications, especially concerning status. It is reported that societal expectations dictate that men should always negotiate hierarchy—their communications should always indicate who the crew and the pilot are in the settings of the messages (Wood, 2009). Inferring from the given illustrations, one notes some existing differences that shape the styles of interpersonal communications between the two genders.
The identified differences in the styles of interpersonal communication in emphasis on the ideas of status v. interpersonal implications, led women to anticipate that relationships should be interdependent—they should be mutually independent—and cooperative. One study, Griffin (2006), argues that women always attempt to emphasize the similarities that exist between themselves and others, which is why they appear to communicate in ways that would make their decisions to express the ethical principle of beneficence, which is the idea that an individual’s decision should attain good for the majority. As one would expect, men would always prefer to communicate in ways that suggest competition and independence since they often express the differences between themselves and others. Consequently, men often make decisions that would satisfy their individual desires and needs (Murawski & Spencer, 2011). The contrasting attributes of the communications from the two genders, therefore, are shaped by the societal expectations that extend the battle for the sexes.
Because of the relationships between men and women in society, the differences in their styles of communication are expressed in marriage and romantic relationships. According to the constructs explained in the preceding paragraphs, men appear to be task specialists while women are relationship specialists (Wood, 2009). In elaboration, other researchers, such as Solomon and Theiss (2012), indicate that women are specialists in rapport talks, which the identified literature refers to as the approach to communication with the objectives of constructing, bolstering, and sustaining relationships (p. 115). This way, it is critical comprehending that rapport skills reflect the capabilities of women in supporting others, expressing empathy, showing emotions, nurturing, and talking with others. Scholars argue further that men are experts in addressing issues about facts and in task accomplishment (Solomon & Theiss, 2012). The cited authors suggest that men are good at report talking, which is defined as approaches to communication that analyzes issues and results in problem resolution (p. 116). Consequently, the report talking tendencies of men is a reflection of the skills in being competitive, focusing on aggressive task accomplishment, and lacking sentimentality in their messages. The described differences in the types and skills of interpersonal communication between men and women may create misunderstandings, some of which are commonly experienced as indicated in the following examples:
Examples
Example 1
Man: I am quite tired. I still have a lot of work left to do, but I am not quite sure how long I will have it done.
Woman: Me too. It seems that there not enough hours during the day!
Man: What do you mean? Are you suggesting that my contributions to our relationship are insufficient?
The conversation in the example indicates the efforts of the women to communicate something about the similarities in her experiences with her partner. In this case, the intended between the lines message in her reply to her husband’s communication is that she understood what he might have been going through and to indicate the he was not alone since she also had the same problem. However, the between the lines communication from her husband appears to express competition for status, since it appears to question what she was complaining about. For example, the husband might have meant that his contribution to the relationship was better than his wife’s or that his wife was not better than he was.
Example 2
Woman: I am very tired now, but I still have a lot of work to cover. I do not even know when I will be done
Man: If you are so tired, I would advice that you take a day off; it would help you rest enough to replenish your energy
Woman: (Sarcastically) Thank you very much! Are you supposing that my contribution to our relationship is quite trivial to the extent that it would not be noticeable even when I did nothing?
From the communication, and using the premises described previously, the man was attempting to communicate that he understood that his wife needed advice and analysis of her situation. Consequently, he indicated that he would focus on the details of the situation and establish the relevant facts that would be useful in offering a decision. The intended between the lines communication from the husband is that he would offer his wife the type of help that she required to solve her problems since he thought he knew an approach that would be resourceful. However, the between the lines communication that the wife perceives from her husband’s communication is that he did not share in her feelings, and that the two of them were not the same, which placed the man in a prime position of telling her what she needed to do.
It is imperative noting that the issues that have been raised in the two examples are results of some subtle variations in the approaches of men and women to problems. For example, it should be noted that at times, women handle problems, especially those that raise emotional concerns through talking about them, sharing the way they feel about the issues, and matching the problems with the experiences of other people (Gamble & Gamble, 2013). The approach that women take to dealing with the problems could be frustrating to the men who always prefer dealing with issues by identifying the facts around them and seeking quick solutions. On some occasions, men would want to perceive women as ungrateful for the solutions and advice that they provide, which causes them to ponder in frustration why the women are adamant to handle their problems (Nelson & Brown, 2012). In the same way, women may feel hurt and dissatisfied by the tendencies of men to offer solutions to their problems as opposed to talking about the issues.
Example 3
Woman: Please call me as soon as you arrive there to let me know that you had a successful journey
Man: I feel that that is a little ridiculous. I have a feeling that nothing bad will happen, which is why I would like you to trust that I will make it safely. However, if anything bad does show up, I am quite sure you will learn of it.
The last example used to construct the differences in the approaches to communication for men and women, the woman appears to communicate and idea that she and her husband were connected, which is why she cared for his safety. The intended between the lines meaning of the communication is that her husband should feel loved and important in the relationship. However, the man appears to have perceived that his wife indicated that he had better checked in with her since she desired to know where he was, the person with whom he would be interacting, and what he was engaged with at all times. The misunderstanding in this last example could be probably because of the variations in the ways that men and women express affection. For example, it is not uncommon for women to express their affection while men often show their affection through doing things—they may do so together or separately within the same physical contexts. It is reported that at times, not having to talk or not talking is a communication of intimacy and trust for the men (Murawski & Spencer, 2012). Overall, the illustrations given in this section of the paper highlight the contributions of societal expectations on the role of sexes to the styles of interpersonal communication of men and women.
Comprehending the variations in the way men and women communicate is the primary approach to getting along. When people misunderstand each other, they always perceive that the motives of those with whom they conflict are unreasonable, worse, or mean spirited. However, through understanding that men and women at times hear and see things through different perspectives, people can start to share the distortions that they experience with one another, which might contribute to the finding of clarity (Murawski & Spencer, 2012). People should always inquire from those with whom they engage in their communications to understand if the second party might have misheard them, especially when they experience anger, disappointment, and surprise from the responses that they receive out of their communications. It is proposed that people who experience any forms of misunderstandings direct others into understanding the causes of the experienced misunderstanding. For instance, is one party in the communication responding to the other’s message with sympathy when they expected a solution? Is one of the parties responding to a message of status with that of affection? When the proposed solution is adopted effectively, it may result in the realization of the goals of communication.
The battle for sexes could be fundamentally rooted in the societal expectations of the role of men and women in society. The premise of the battle of sexes may have contributed significantly to the focus of the media on the notion that men and women communicate quite differently, and that the differences are so wide that they may suggest that the two genders originate to different planets. Nevertheless, this essay has argued that despite the existence of differences in their approaches to interpersonal communication, the gap is not as wide as some researchers may suggest. For instance, it has been argued that both men and women are capable of being sentimental, nurturing, task-focused, and aggressive in their communications. The variations that exist in their ways of communicating, this paper has argued, relate to the conventional perceptions of the roles of women and men in society. For instance, men appear to be report-focused in their communications—they are always concerned with analyzing problems and delivering solutions that would dictate their power and competitive status. Contrarily, women tend to be more rapport-focused in their communications since they most appear to be nurturing and sentimental. The differences that exist in their approaches of communication should not drive people from the two genders to conflict, but each of the parties should attempt to comprehend the causes of the misunderstanding with the objective of reaching a consensus.
References
Gamble, T. K., & Gamble, M. W. (2013 ). Interpersonal communication: Building connections together. Sage Publications.
Griffin, E. M. (2006). A first look at communication theory . McGraw-Hill.
Murawski, W. W., & Spencer, S. (2011). Collaborate, communicate, and differentiate!: How to increase student learning in today’s diverse schools . Corwin Press.
Nelson, A., & Brown, C. D. (2012). The gender communication handbook: Conquering conversational collisions between men and women . John Wiley & Sons.
Solomon, D., & Theiss, J. (2012). Interpersonal communication: Putting theory into practice . Routledge.
Tannen, D. (2013): You just don't understand. Women and men in conversation. Sintagma: revista de lingüística, 1992 , vol. 4, p. 89-91.
Torppa, C. B. (2010). Gender issues: Communication differences in interpersonal relationships. The Ohio State University Fact Sheet: Family and Consumer Science.
Wood, J. (2012). Gendered lives . Nelson Education.
