Women's Talk and Men's Talk

[Mole]

By and large women enjoy talking with each other. This is because women talk to make each other feel better.

And by and large men talk about reality.

And this explains why, by and large, women don't like talking to men so much. And this is because women want talk to make them feel better not to relate to reality.

And women try to teach men to talk in such a way as to make them feel better. But men are pretty hopeless at this.

 

[Rasofy]

where are the feminists when we need them

 

[Firebird 8118]

where are the feminists when we need them

Meh - I'm siding with the guys on this one.

 

[Mole]

Meh - I'm siding with the guys on this one.

I think there is much to be said for both kinds of talk.

It's plain that in a prosperous society men can now afford talk that makes us feel better.

In prosperous societies we no longer have to worry about survival so we can start to practise the arts of prosperity.

And one of the great arts of prosperity is conversation. And one of the benefits of good conversation is that it makes us feel better.

 

[Halla74]

Talk is cheap.
Actions speak louder than words.

<*drops the microphone*>

 

[ptgatsby]

By and large women enjoy talking with each other. This is because women talk to make each other feel better.

And by and large men talk about reality.

And this explains why, by and large, women don't like talking to men so much. And this is because women want talk to make them feel better not to relate to reality.

And women try to teach men to talk in such a way as to make them feel better. But men are pretty hopeless at this.

IIRC, and it has been a while, men do indeed talk about more concrete things than women do, at least starting in University. Cause unknown, but it is like to be social conditioning. In terms of emotional support and such, it is also primarily social conditioning. It's not a question of ability and there is a huge overlap between the two. In any case, the social effect on communication is much larger with men than women (YMMV, Western world). It's not like one talks more than the other, it's just that men are told to not express a part of themselves.

(OTOH, women have to be careful what they express too... our society is still very sensitive to strong women.)

 

[Mole]

IIRC, and it has been a while, men do indeed talk about more concrete things than women do, at least starting in University. Cause unknown, but it is like to be social conditioning. In terms of emotional support and such, it is also primarily social conditioning. It's not a question of ability and there is a huge overlap between the two. In any case, the social effect on communication is much larger with men than women (YMMV, Western world). It's not like one talks more than the other, it's just that men are told to not express a part of themselves.

(OTOH, women have to be careful what they express too... our society is still very sensitive to strong women.)

Yes, this is true.

In societies struggling to survive men and women must be limited in what we say in the interests of survival.

However in prosperous societies we are learning the arts of prosperity.

We started in 1946 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in their National Training Laboratory (NTL) with the first Encounter Group, where just after the horror of WW II we started to learn the art of conversation and encounter one another as persons rather than parts of a military machine.

 

[five sounds]

there's a lot of research on gender and discourse in the field of sociolinguistics.
i haven't gone too deep into that area, because it's less interesting to me. but i had a professor who was all about it.

found this huge ass article that seems pretty inclusive, though. and i recognize a few of the names from when i studied it. poke around it at your leisure if you care to. http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/5593953/1378527240/name/the_handbook_of_language_and_gender.pdf#page=37

 

[Mole]

Converstion and Verse

Interestingly con-verse, as in con-vers-ation, means the sharing of verse.

And as we move into the conversational society, we are starting to return to our roots in the spoken culture, which interestingly enough spoke in verse.

For 200,000 years we lived in a spoken culture, but only in the last 100 years in properous countries have we lived in countries of universal literacy.

But as I write we are moving from literacy to the electronic culture which in many respects is like the old spoken culture. And so we rediscover conversation. And as we become better conversationlists, we shall learn to make each other feel better and speak in verse.

 

[Mole]

Talk is cheap.
Actions speak louder than words.

This is the dictum of the survival society.

Thriving societies practise the arts of conversation.

 

[Coriolis]

I think there is much to be said for both kinds of talk.

It's plain that in a prosperous society men can now afford talk that makes us feel better.

In prosperous societies we no longer have to worry about survival so we can start to practise the arts of prosperity.

And one of the great arts of prosperity is conversation. And one of the benefits of good conversation is that it makes us feel better.

Frivolous, empty, gossipy conversation - in short, conversation mostly associated with women - is neither artistic nor satisfying, and makes me feel I have landed in Stepford. If prosperity means our conversation deteriorates to drivel, perhaps we need to take on more challenges and leave our complacency behind.

Talk is cheap.
Actions speak louder than words.

Absolutely.

 

[Mole]

Frivolous, empty, gossipy conversation - in short, conversation mostly associated with women - is neither artistic nor satisfying, and makes me feel I have landed in Stepford. If prosperity means our conversation deteriorates to drivel, perhaps we need to take on more challenges and leave our complacency behind.


Absolutely.

This is extraordinarily sexist, and from a moderator who is at best ambivalent at stopping emotional abuse.

 

[Totenkindly]

By and large women enjoy talking with each other. This is because women talk to make each other feel better.

And by and large men talk about reality.]

WTF?!

You have quite the way with words... but I suppose we already all knew this. I'm going to assume you mean men talk about extraneous details, whereas women tend to talk more about relationships/people?

I've been to enough guy circles where the talk is about sports, or favorite TV shows, or personal hobbies, etc. And girl circles where the talk is about who is doing what and how they are relating to whom. But I also find enough solid men and women who talk about more substantial matters as well... to the degree I do not think of it in terms of gender but in terms of content of conversation with people I like.

 

[Coriolis]

This is extraordinarily sexist, and from a moderator who is at best ambivalent at stopping emotional abuse.

It is sexist, but not in the way you imply. As other members have mentioned, women have been raised for generations to converse in this manner. It is no wonder therefore that this communication style is exhibited primarily by women. That is just an observation of fact. Abusing women (or men) emotionally or otherwise when they depart from these traditional patterns is what is sexist, hurtful, and wrong.

I've been to enough guy circles where the talk is about sports, or favorite TV shows, or personal hobbies, etc. And girl circles where the talk is about who is doing what and how they are relating to whom. But I also find enough solid men and women who talk about more substantial matters as well... to the degree I do not think of it in terms of gender but in terms of content of conversation with people I like.

I agree, especially in principle. And I have no more patience with men's sports, TV, or car talk than with women's housekeeping, kids, beauty tips, and gossip talk. I, too, find both men and women who are interested in the kind of substantive conversation I prefer, but the men significantly outnumber the women, at least IRL.

 

[Mole]

It is sexist, but not in the way you imply. As other members have mentioned, women have been raised for generations to converse in this manner. It is no wonder therefore that this communication style is exhibited primarily by women. That is just an observation of fact. Abusing women (or men) emotionally or otherwise when they depart from these traditional patterns is what is sexist, hurtful, and wrong.

At the end of WW II we started to create prosperous societies based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And right from the very beginning, in 1946 at MIT, we set about learning and practising the arts of conversation.

This very site, Typology Central, is based upon good conversation.

So what we need are moderators committed to engendering good conversation.

And I don't have any confidence that you want to engender good conversation.

 

[Totenkindly]

I agree, especially in principle. And I have no more patience with men's sports, TV, or car talk than with women's housekeeping, kids, beauty tips, and gossip talk. I, too, find both men and women who are interested in the kind of substantive conversation I prefer, but the men significantly outnumber the women, at least IRL.

That's too bad. Actually, in my life currently, the women are the ones who have their heads more together than the guys, but I guess it can vary depending on environment.

*reads rest of thread*

Oh god, I'm laughing so hard I can't breathe. My neighbors probably wonder what's wrong with me. Maybe I should get them to join the forum.

 

[Coriolis]

At the end of WW II we started to create prosperous societies based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

And right from the very beginning, in 1946 at MIT, we set about learning and practising the arts of conversation.

This very site, Typology Central, is based upon good conversation.

So what we need are moderators committed to engendering good conversation.

And I don't have any confidence that you want to engender good conversation.

Someone who believes that the art of good conversation started in 1946 is in no position to judge the conversation quality of others, especially given its inherent subjectivity. Your idea of "good" conversation may be my idea of drivel, and vice versa.

 

[Mole]

Someone who believes that the art of good conversation started in 1946 is in no position to judge the conversation quality of others, especially given its inherent subjectivity. Your idea of "good" conversation may be my drivel, and vice versa.

For quite a while now you have tried to pick a fight with me. This is not suitable behaviour for a moderator.

 

[Coriolis]

For quite a while now you have tried to pick a fight with me. This is not suitable behaviour for a moderator.

For quite awhile now you have interpreted direct questioning or pointing out flaws in your reasoning as attempting "to pick a fight". This is not suitable behavior for a reasonable person who wants his point of view to be taken seriously.

You have many worthwhile ideas to share, and no cause to feel threatened when others pay them the respect of a thorough consideration, and earnest response.

 

[zago]

OP does have truth to it. There are exceptions to all generalities but this is indeed a source of frustration.