Blog Prompt for 3/3/2010
This week you are reading the chapters on the ways in which both verbal and nonverbal communication are gendered. Many times we would like to assume that language doesn’t really matter, but after reading the chapter on gendered verbal communication, I hope you were able to see the ways in which language not only reflects but also sustains the our culture’s views of masculinity and femininity. Also, I hope you see the ways that our nonverbal communications expresses our views of gender differences.
Write a response to these two chapters citing examples of the ways that male generic language reinforces stereotypes and demeans women, spotlights women and dismisses them. Also indicate the ways in which nonverbal communication is related to appearance, commanding space and power and indicating submissiveness. Please cite the text and use personal examples to indicate your full understanding of the two chapters.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wood’s chapters on verbal and nonverbal communication bring attention to how the differences between men’s and women’s responses to such communication affect how they view themselves and each other.
ReplyDeleteWhen communicating in the English language, it comes down to the basic structure: man/woman and masculine/feminine. The communication by/between men are filled with various ways to devalue women and anything feminine.
The ways men describe women lowers their value by the terms they use such as: “baby doll, girly, little darling, sugar, sweet, etc.” Other terms are used to devalue a woman based on her age (“girls,” [female hasn’t started puberty, which doesn’t recognize them as adults but as children. Or by their levels of sexual activity i.e. “slut.”
Language also organizes gender perceptions. Most of these stem from stereotypes that are associated with women but men. The perception that a woman is “emotional and weak” or if their communication with men is assertive with reasoning and logic, they are described as “bitchy or rude.” Throughout high school, it appeared to me that teen boys where “emotionally weak” and lacked the ability to reason logically. Their only forms of communication were the constant repetition of obscenities to one another. Teen girls on the other hand were calculating when it came to high school girl “revenge.” They used undetected assertiveness to manipulate others into their favor without their “popular girl” image described in any negative way.
The way language defines women by men is also different. Women’s sport(s) broadcasting is always focused on their appearances (wardrobe and hairstyles) not their athletic abilities. An example of this type of prejudice of how women’s appearance in the spot(s) associated world is the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Yang Pei won her place to be a singer, based on her talent, at the opening ceremony. Her appearance, deemed “unattractive enough,” resulted in her being replaced by an “acceptable” looking girl who was lip-syncing her singing in the background out of view. In the high school girl’s locker room, the girls always focused on how to arrange their gym shorts and t-shirts to get noticed more for their looks than their ability to do anything sports like. Usually when called for any type of sports participation, they had a bounce in their walk, which always cheered the guys on, but not in a sportsman like way.
Language used by men, which is viewed as socially acceptable, reflects stereotypes about women’s sexual roles. “He laid/banged/screwed/balled her” are used to enforce the idea that women are passive in sexual activity while men are active and “dominant,” these terms are seen as appropriate and acceptable. For men such as Arnold Schwarzenagger, during his campaign when called on by multiple women for an explanation of the multiple sexual harassment advances made, he explained/clarified these behaviors as “playful” and “rowdy.” Reinforcing the ignorant view that “playful” and “rowdy” is not in anyway, shape, or form of unwanted sexual attention/harassment that doesn’t need to reprimanded or punished. I was never part of the “opposite gender relationship” social sphere in high school and kept mostly to my studies and ignoring this type of behavior by the other students. I know it existed in the school but I don’t have any personal experience with it.
ReplyDeleteNon-verbal communication also comes down to gender and gender roles.
The artifacts used to express and identify femininity and masculinity differs greatly. Male clothing is designed to be functional and free moving. The clothing has pockets that allow men to carry only the necessary items with ease. Most of the guys in high school wore pants two sizes too big that fell off of them as they walked. They were constantly pulling them up or getting reprimanded by faculty to the point where the school had enforced strict boy’s wardrobe policies.
For women, clothing calls attention their bodies and attempts to “enhance” attractiveness to the viewers, dominantly males. Not only are “desired” clothing items but also physical appearance are culturally enforcing women to buy beauty products and body altering cosmetic surgery make women submissive to unrealistic “ideals”. Personally, I never wore the stylish clothing or carrying, always sticking to the baggy jeans and baggy hoodies. It never bothered me about how my appearance affected my status in the high school social hierarchy but I know it was crucial for other girls, both popular and the “wannabes.” I always heard them (the popular girls) complain about their parents taking away their credit cards because they had maxed them out, presumably at the mall since all their clothing, hairstyles, and make up was what was “in” at the time.
The ability to have control over another through space reinforces status and dominance, usually in men and generally with women giving up their space. Men and women’s attitude towards territory also differ in which men will generally enter another’s, who has less power. By taking up the most space, many cultures view this as having more importance and privilege. I never gave a chance for entrance into my personal space to anyone, both boys and girls. I generally avoided the crowds in the hall by moving the fastest to my destination so as not to have any invasion in my space or get into anyone else’s. When my space was invaded my reaction was hostile making other people avoid me and see me as unapproachable.
ReplyDeleteIn conclusion, nonverbal communication differs greatly between the sexes. For women, it is considered the norm to be sensitive, display more interest, constrict themselves physically, and give up space. Ideals like these for women reinforce negative attitudes about self-image. For men, nonverbal communication, self-assertion, and enhanced territory are status symbols of ideal masculine power.
Male generic language is used to refer to both women and men, “yet refers to only men” (pg.118) for example business man and mankind. Research found that leads to the assumption that these roles are filed by men. Spotlighting, when a person’s sex is highlighted, for example woman doctor also “reinforce the idea that men are the standard” (pg.118) and that women are an exception in that profession. When describing women the focus seems to be on appearances and many times the person’s ability is overlooked. Many times women are also identified by their relationship to others. I can remember the first time when I was introduced to someone by my husband’s friend as “Bill’s wife”. At that moment it felt as if I had completely lost my identity and just became someone’s possession.
ReplyDeleteLanguage is also a tool through which we express our gendered identity. Feminine speech regards communication as “a primary way to establish and maintain relationships with others” (pg.128) and it is used to support others. On the other hand masculine speech is used to “accomplish concrete goals, exert control, preserve independence, entertain, and enhance status” (pg.130). I thought that it was interesting that studies indicate contrary to popular beliefs that men tend to talk more and at greater length than women.
Non verbal communication for example gestures, volume, clothing and environmental factors add to the total meaning of communication. People use this to express themselves as gendered. Through non verbal communication men can “command space and volume, defend their turf, and display little facial expressions to keep their feelings camouflaged” (pg166). Women can show femininity by speaking softly and their clothing and appearance also plays an important role in their gender representation.
Wood made it clear that it is up to us to focus on alternative styles of communicating within our cultural society. You need to find a way to express your personal identity in verbal and non verbal ways.
These chapters brought up a lot of ways in which we are gendered through verbal and non-verbal communication. I found a variety of examples that I could personally relate to as well. I think one of the most basic and often ignored ways in which verbal communication demeans women is through male generic language. Woods reminds us of words such as businessman, spokesman, mailman, and mankind which excludes women. Using terms like lady doctor or woman lawyer, Woods explains, only highlights women as an exception. It is clear through the evidence of studies on male generic language that using terms that reinforce the “male standard” only furthers stereotypes and demeans women. In the experiment children would usually associate men with male generic words and thus they would build their gender stereotypes. (118) Chapter 5 really emphasizes how important naming is in shaping gender. Everything from whether women take their husband’s name after marriage to how sexual assault is named all play a role in enforcing stereotypes and demeaning women. I was particularly appalled to realize that for so many years sexual assault or rape were referred to as “making advances or being pushy”. (121) Also I never realized that some of the common terms we here in our society to describe women are really demeanoring. Woods uses examples such as baby doll, girlie or sweet thing and cookie. I hadn’t previously thought of those terms as negative towards women but I now realize how they stereotype women as immature or juvenile as Woods explains. (123) I did always however think it was very double standard for promiscuous women to be considered sluts whereas men that do the same are considered studs and congratulated for such acts. Our society accepts and praises men that sleep with a lot of women and rebuke women who sleep with several men. Although I think this certainly has changed a lot in the past few decades. I did like the word androgynous that Woods introduced on pg 124 because it accepts that a person can be both masculine and feminine. I think I would consider myself androgynous because I think I have qualities that society would attribute to both genders. In fact I would think that a lot of people could fit under this definition because I don’t think very many people are strictly “feminine” or “masculine”. If certain attributes such as sensitive and compassionate are attributed to femininity as Woods explains, then I am sure plenty of males and females have had those traits at one time or another. The same goes for the “masculine” traits such as assertive and ambitious. (124)
ReplyDelete-Nadia Quiroga
Chapter 6 brought up a lot of examples of gender nonverbal communication, which I think we all encounter every day. A general theme throughout this chapter is the importance of power and how it plays a large role in gender nonverbal communication. The role of power or control that Woods discusses specifically on pg. 142 most caught my attention. I see all the time how people are constantly tying to assert their power in relation to their physical positions. I really enjoyed reading the three examples of Person A and Person B because those are examples that I experience all the time. Just today I found myself in predicament while walking on campus from the parking lot. I was heading to class on the sidewalk, which still had slush and mud around the edges, and I see two girls walking towards me on the sidewalk taking up the entire width of the sidewalk. I expected one of the girls to move slightly so that I could pass since the sidewalk was not wide enough for all three of us to walk side by side. However neither girl flinched, and I started to slow down to signal to them that somebody had to move because I was not walking in the mud! Still it seemed they were so wrapped up in their conversation that they didn’t move for me. I saw no other option but to keep walking my course and of course my arm and shoulder slammed right into one of them. This doesn’t bother me since I’m used to mixed martial arts contact sports, but I was still annoyed at how careless these girls were. It almost seemed like a type of “showdown” where I was expected to back down to these girls. I have encountered this so many times in my life I think because I am a woman and I am so short and petite. It has always been something I have had to overcome, but I have found that by being louder, physically stronger, and simply not backing down, I tend to surprise other people and hold my own ground. Another example where this is prominent in my life is at metal concerts. Although at shows it’s usually a time to just hang out with friends and listen to good music, there is a lot of territoriality and power conflicts. During the show the crowd squeezes, as close to the stage as possible and it is very important to stand your ground and be ready for waves of bodies pushing up against you throughout the concert. Being so short it’s a definite disadvantage for me, but I am surprisingly strong for my stature and I can certainly push back, and hard! I won’t even mention getting caught in the midst of mosh pits! I think this is one of the main reasons why I am so disturbed by popular culture today and how women seem to be shrinking on tv, magazines, and the internet. On pages 150 and 151, Woods gives us some very good facts regarding this “shrinking” of the woman in popular culture. I wasn’t surprised to find out that Miss America and Playboy models have dramatically increased their BMIs in the past few decades. I can’t imagine that they both average out today at less than 18.5 which is considered underweight. (151) It is sad that young women growing up in today’s society are force fed these images everywhere they look. Its no wonder eating disorders are so prominent! I feel very lucky to have what I think is solid self-esteem and be very self-assured. I know for a fact I can never actually resemble any of these models I see because my body was not built to ever look like that, at least health wise.
ReplyDeleteThe imbalance between appearance for men and women is also very clear. Woods states “87% of men in America are very or somewhat satisfied with their appearance”. (148-149) This is very sad compared to the fact that by 13 years old 53% of young women are unsatisfied with their bodies. (150) This is yet another example of how our popular culture is forcing gender stereotypes on the population and forcing women to become smaller and smaller, at dangerous costs. This reminds of the documentary we watched last class and how our society is literally reducing the actual physical space women take up in our society. Men must become more muscular like G.I. Joe action figures, and women must become thinner. Kinesics is also another way in which nonverbal communication enforces gender stereotypes. Woods explain that women are more likely to produce more face and body movements. Things such as “tilting heads, smiling, and condensing their bodies” are all good examples. (146) I realize now that I am constantly smiling and tilting my head when talking to someone, even when I don’t feel like it. I recall my family calling me a brat for not feeling like smiling all the time when in reality I was perfectly happy but I just was tired of smiling. All these examples are very prominent in our everyday lives but we sometimes choose to ignore them. These chapters, along with all the others I have read this semester, have contributed greatly to my growing knowledge of how our environment genders our lives. It makes me wonder whether there will ever be a stop put to stereotypes as well as communications that demeanor women and impose gender roles on people. I certainly hope average BMIs for women do not continue to decline or else women will disappear into thin air!
ReplyDelete-Nadia Quiroga
Woods describes what it means to portray yourself through gendered verbal communication. Language is the most powerful symbol in our culture. The way language is important is that is states our culture values, views and norms through gender. Male generic language often excludes women. This is done so by popular uses of our language. Common terms like “businessman, mankind and spokesman” continuously suppress women through language and create specific stereotypes.
ReplyDeleteLanguage also defines men and women differently. Women are described through their appearance and their relationships with people. Men are defined through their accomplishments, work and activities.
Nonverbal communication is directed with nonverbal messages towards males and females. People communicate nonverbally in ways that describe their identities as masculine and feminine. Space is a common factor of indicating nonverbal communication. Space is distributed different in cultures to indicate who is most powerful. For example, powerful executives and CEO’s have large private offices, secretaries usually have cramped cubbies with little space in the center of the office. Space displays the importance of power.
Nonverbal ways that women can show their felinity is by wearing make up, curling their hair, shaving their legs and wearing high heels. This explains that women nonverbally “care” about their appearance and are considered girly. Males can wear earrings in their ears and even dye their hair. This nonverbally shows that men are displaying their femininity and can be nonverbally judged.
Wood describes many examples to support how our verbal and nonverbal communication as a society and as an individual express our own gender identities and the societal views of gender roles. One of the key indicators that verbal language reinforces societies negative stereotypes of women and the dismissal of women is called male generic language. Before reading this Wood chapter, I was familiar with these terms she provides as evidence, but I never focused my energy to the fact that these words were blatantly dismissing women and so widely used in today's media communication. Words like "freshman" and "businessman"(p.118) are words casually spoken today in conversation and throughout media sources but are undeniably leaving women out.
ReplyDeleteVerbal communication in the media also perpetuate stereotypes of women and misconceptions of woman's role in society. An example of this that comes to mind from a personal experience is when recently Sarah Palin, former vice-presidential candidate, was traveling the country giving speaking tours and promoting her book. I am not a particular fan of what Sarah Palin has to say in terms of her political ideologies, but I respect her as a strong women in government. That being said, I caught myself in a huge funk when I said to me mom, "Sarah Palin shouldn't be giving book tours, she should be home taking care of her kids." My mom didn't let two seconds go by before pointing out that male political candidates or spokes people are never criticized for being away from their families. I was really taken back that I had said this statement, but it just supports the fact that whether I like it or not, I am no more immune to the influences of media on gender roles than anyone else.
Along with the way we perceive and process verbal communication to enforce and constrict gender roles, nonverbal communication is just as, if not more, of a supporting factor in the perpetuation of gender constraints and societal ideas. Wood examines ways that men and women communicate nonverbally that relate to the way society views male and female. Nonverbal communication, such as posture, hand gestures, greeting practices, and even objects like toys, clothing, and advertisements, all express cultural views of gender at the present time, and are great examples of evidence in communication that keeps women confined to smaller "space".
This idea of "space" is what intrigued me the most about this passage, and it has not been until this class that I have been able to make the connection between woman's decreasing space and power in the media and public perception and ideals. Women take up less symbolic space as well as less actual space in nonverbal communication today. In advertisements, for example, as shown in "Killing us Softly" and described in Wood, women in print and tv media are getting skinnier and skinnier, decreasing the amount of "actual" space they are allowed in an ad, and at the same time decreasing their "symbolic" space in American culture where women needs to be soft spoken, skinny, obedient, and "touchable".
If anything, these passages in Wood have helped me reflect on my own personal experiences with verbal and non verbal communication and how they shape my perceptions of male and female, and how I personally communicate my ideas on gender roles verbally and nonverbally to others and my community.
Chapter Five explores the many ways in which our language defines men and women, and how, in general, men and women differ in how they express themselves verbally. Wood cites convincing evidence which suggests male-generic terms are about much more than being politically correct; the gender-biased nomenclature our society uses, especially with professional titles, influences how those titles are perceived. In effect, careers are gendered.
ReplyDeleteWood also mentions how verbal descriptions of men and women differ. What stuck out most to me was the point she makes about the focus of female athletics being more on appearance than athletic skill. This is a frequent point of contention with me that is also depicted in non-verbal ways. When professional female athletes are seen in supplement or ads, they are almost always over-sexualized to sell a product.
Another point in Chapter Five that resonated with me is the idea that women’s sexuality takes a passive role in our language. When we speak about a man and a woman having sex, the phrases are generally constructed as if sex “happens” to women and men control the activity.
I was also really happy to see the section on ‘Language Evaluates Gender.’ I always have an issue when anyone (and it’s usually someone I barely know) refers to me as “sweetie,” “honey,” or any other term along those lines. Some of my friends say I’m quirky because it’s such a big deal to me, but I just find it extremely condescending. Wood calls such terms “trivializing,” “immature,” and “juvenile” (p.123).
Chapter Six discusses the non-verbal forms of language that also influence and are affected by gender constructs. One of the first differences noted between male and female non-verbal expression is in clothing. While male clothing is designed to be more functional, female clothing is designed to be physically attractive and attract attention. I loved that Wood added this final point on the subject:”Furthermore, most women’s shoes are designed to flatter legs at the cost of comfort and safety…” (143). Too many nights out have been spoiled for me by the ridiculousness of high heels.
There was one thing in Chapter Six that I felt was poorly represented. I thought the section on 'Beauty: His and Hers,' which discusses cosmetic surgery, was written very subjectively. It’s clear that the author is against cosmetic surgery for what she perceives as an act of vanity. I felt she was too presumptuous in assuming what motivates everyone to have these procedures, and I don’t think it’s fair for her to judge what is “healthy” or “excessive” in how we concern ourselves with our own appearance. I also notice that while the author is quick to point out all of the possible complications/ side effects of these particular procedures, she fails to mention any of those that are associated with sexual reassignment surgery when she discusses transsexuals in Chapter One. I can’t be certain that I would ever personally elect to have cosmetic surgery, but I like the idea that people can now have a greater degree of freedom with their physical appearance. I think Wood devalues the role that aesthetics play in shaping who we are. Just as one may feel he or she was born with a biological sex that doesn’t match the gender (a societal construct based largely on appearance) he or she feels on the inside, one may feel that his or her physical attributes are incongruent with the insides as well. I am just in favor of people having freedom…...freedom to do what they want with their own bodies, and freedom to express themselves in the manner that gives them the most harmony.
^ Maryann Glascock
ReplyDeleteJulie Allstrom's post:Blog prompt for 3/3/10
ReplyDeleteReading about male generic language in Chapter 5 of Wood’s text this week reminded me of a long and contentious workplace struggle in which I was involved some years ago. I worked for a state government agency that conducted training sessions on a number of topics for supervisors and managers. The struggle was over the use of the word “he” in our printed materials to indicate either a man or woman. It seemed like quite a victory when we finally agreed to use “s/he” instead of “he” or “he or she.”
This occurred at about the same time the Christian denomination to which I belong – the Episcopal Church – was debating over the issue of women becoming ordained clergy. Many people seemed obsessed over forms of address, saying things like, “What would we call them? Priestesses? Lady priests? Mothers?” It took a long time for that kind of spotlighting terminology to recede from common usage in the U.S. churches. Unfortunately, it is still quite prevalent in other parts of the world-wide Anglican communion where, even now, women are prevented from being ordained.
Wood points out that our language demeans and dismisses women by using certain categories of words. These include labels to indicate immaturity (girl, baby doll), food (honey, sweetie), and animals (chick, bitch). But many of my family members, most of whom were born and raised in the South, refer to each other by favorite food names. This includes the men. My oldest daughter and her husband use “biscuit” as a term of endearment for each other. However, none of us would address anyone outside our circle of family and close friends like that. I’ve realized that we use it inside the circle as a form of irony on cultural norms.
In Chapter 6, Wood describes the various forms of nonverbal communication, including artifacts, proxemics, haptics, kinesics, paralanguage and physical appearance. I have become very aware of proxemics (space and our use of it) and kinesics (facial and body movements) lately. On campus, for example, there are many instances of people coming in and out of doorways or walking on sidewalks too narrow for several people at a time. When I noticed my own inclination to step aside or yield to the human traffic, I stopped stepping aside. Sometimes people bump into me or stop and stare. When I stare back, they yield the space. When I ride Metro buses and trains to my downtown D.C. internship site, men usually take up more room in the seats. Many women will try to take up less than half the seat, even when sitting with another woman.
The biggest concern to me is our culture’s obsession with physical appearance, both for men and women. The beliefs that we can and should change our faces and bodies by dieting, cosmetics, clothing, medications and surgeries have affected every age group. We are exposed to standards of appearance that have been airbrushed and digitally altered but presented as normal. It is very hard to maintain one’s self esteem under these conditions. Two of my daughters developed eating disorders as young teens. One’s experience was much more severe than the other’s; we found out eventually that she was eating cotton balls to make herself feel full. Fortunately, we found help for her and she developed healthier ways to feel in control over her own body.
The move for “politically correct” language began many years ago. Flight attendant replaced stewardess, mail carrier replaced mail man, and so on. My parents dismissed the idea as liberal foolishness and I agreed that changing the words was silly. Then, I studied Confucius. He spoke of the importance of the ritual use of words, of using words of respect for elders, for example. He believed that words gain meaning and power through their repeated use. The words themselves shape how we think and feel – they create their own reality. Confucius was a keen observer of humanity and modern scientific research has confirmed his point – words matter. Woods cites a 1973 study where children were strongly influenced in their selection of chapter representative photographs depending on the use of male generic language (ex. mankind) or non-male language (pg. 118). This demonstrates that we unconsciously limit our understanding of those who are allowed to (or do) participate in areas of public and private life based on cues from unconscious language. Demanding the use of inclusive language forces us to wake up and think about the words we use and the implications of those choices.
ReplyDeleteWoods then discusses the power of naming to even allow discussion to begin. She cites the example of sexual harassment. Before the name reflected the nature of the act, the euphemisms “being pushy” or “making advances” trivialized both the act and the women who felt violated, and turned the men into merely high spirited boys. She also talks about the many words where women participants in an activity are given diminutive names, “suffragette” or “majorette”, that highlight their lower status than that of the male participants. Or “spotlight” the fact that a woman is participating (sending the message that it is an exceptional situation that a woman is in that role).
I read several sections of the chapter that covered the differences in masculine speech and feminine speech to my husband. We have had countless arguments because of the differences in communication styles that Woods describes. On Friday night, my husband and I went out for dinner. As we ate we discussed work, school, and family. When my husband talked, I watched his face, made eye contact, made noises of support or dismay, asked questions to get him to continue, and said things like, “Wow, I know that is so frustrating for you. When that happens to me I want to scream.” When I was talking, my husband’s eyes scanned the restaurant, he rarely (if ever) asked follow-up questions, and rarely keyed onto any emotional aspect of my discussion or anything unrelated to the key functional points. Fifteen minutes into our conversation, I was so frustrated that I stopped talking cold – he was massively confused as to why I was angry and had thought we were having a great time. The previous interaction is explained by Wood in chapter 5. Unfortunately for me and my husband, intellectually understanding the different communication styles has not translated into an emotional acceptance of those differences.
Nonverbal communication speaks as loudly as any word. Woods explores many areas of nonverbal communication and the expectations and value judgments made based on these silent cues. Many of the ideas discussed are very familiar to me because I am a student of facial and body language. I attribute my intense attention in this area to both the fact that I am a woman (women seem to have a biological strength in nonverbal processing) and to standpoint theory. As a woman and an abuse survivor, I have had to be hyper vigilant to the clues given nonverbally in an effort to stay safe.
ReplyDeleteWoods discusses the greater space taken up by men (literally and figuratively). How women are constrained by our clothing and shoes – no pockets, tight, and not conducive to free movement. Whereas men’s clothing is practical and physically freeing. She talks about the issues of personal space as displays of power and gives the example of the woman’s spaces in the house (kitchen and sewing room) being where they continue to serve others. Whereas the man’s spaces in the house (office and workroom) are spaces where he can “get away” from responsibilities. Women are constrained in how we hold our bodies. When we sit, we cross our legs, cross our arms, clasp our hands. When we stand, we often even cross our legs or stand sideways or legs together. Women rarely gesticulate largely, stand with a broad stance, or sit with legs akimbo. In Tough Guise, the narrator talks about the stances of men and women in popular culture and Jean Kilbourne discusses the same thing in Killing Us Softly 3. I was at Best Buy this weekend looking for new headphones for use in the gym when I saw two boxes containing the exact same exercise headphones. The first box pictured a muscular man standing tall, with chest out, and hands on each hip, manly gazing off into the distance. The second box pictured a slender woman in tight figure hugging workout clothing, squatting down tying her shoe, and looking up at the photographer with a smile. With that one photograph, the woman’s athleticism has been co-opted and with the other the power of man has been re-asserted. I know that we are influenced by the images we see – so I am going to remember the image of Brandy Chastain celebrating her soccer win and the vision of the Canadian women’s hockey team celebrating their Olympic gold medal on the ice smoking cigars and drinking beer – how unladylike – what fun!
Communication occurs whenever some information is transferred from something to another. Everything from the way we stand to the people we associate with all indicate and communicate something each of us to others. This class has helped me think much more about the words the people around me use on a daily basis. The lyrics in songs, the playful names my friends and I call each other, the tact that must be used in a professional situation are all things that we take for granted but can all somehow serve as gendered communication.
ReplyDeleteI have a book called Definitive Book of Body Language that I found fascinating. Just the first couple of chapters are all about smiles, handshakes, eyes and stances. These chapters by Wood were very similar to my book in that she discussed kinesics and body language but obviously, this reading had more emphasis on the distinction among gender. Around page 147, Wood discusses how woman tend to show more emotion and facial expression when talking to someone. They keep more eye contact and are more connected. I definitely keep eye contact when I talk to let them know I truly care and want to understand, but the verbal responses are apparently different between genders. My mom and I always come back to the discussion of how men “fix” and women “listen.” Whenever she tells me a story about her day, I want to give her a solution and tell her what everything means. She always yells at me because apparently, “when woman tell a story, they want to be heard.” Women tend to want to “vent” and just talk to talk which indicates that women run on emotion and sympathy rather than actually doing something about a situation. What I'm wondering is why women want to waste the breath if there is nothing to be done, but this is probably a whole other issue...
I went to a dinner tonight for a Fraternity on campus. The brothers were walking around greeting everyone at each table. There were mostly women at this dinner, and a couple men. Unless they were standing already, hardly any of the women being greeted stood up. It made me think of how whenever men greet someone, they stand up. Perhaps this is out of respect, but this action also happens to make the greeter seem physically larger and taller before introduction. Also when in conversation, men generally stand with their feet far apart with hands in pockets or crossed in front of them, often making their chests higher and the arm width wider. It wouldn't be strange to see a woman standing with her feet together, her arms at her side of delicately holding the other one. I hadn't thought of this before, but even a woman's high heels, by proof of the footprint, takes up less space as well. They force her to stand taller, but also to walk on her toes as it too fragile or not allowed to make a full impact or sound. Even the other clothes we wear indicates that we want to take up less space. Men tend to wear clothes that are too big on them (baggy jeans, oversize shirts). Woman wear things that fit them to show of how slender they are or should be. Otherwise, they'll wear bigger clothes to hide their figure and are them called masculine or frumpy.
~Tamara
In the film “Tough Guise” it was discussed how language makes women as passive individuals and men as the active individuals. I think that this was one of the points that really hit me because in the media nine times out of ten a headline will read “a woman was killed” rather than “a husband killed his wife”. I wonder what an impact it would make if the women no longer were represented as passive in the media. The Wood text says that this language in the media may occur “because men are expected to be sexual initiators; [and] inappropriate and sexual initiative by men is sometimes described in language that makes it seem acceptable” (Wood, 120). I think the last part of that quotation “acceptable” is exactly were society is going wrong, these acts should not simply be discarded as normal and okay because then to men what isn’t okay and “acceptable”? I do believe that like most everything, this way of being begins at a young age when boys are taught that rough play is acceptable.
ReplyDeleteAnother part of the text that really spoke to me was feminine speech; because it was not until I fully analyzed the language of women did a light bulb finally go off. At work last night, an old man wandered into our restaurant lost and confused. He kept telling us that he doesn’t know how he got here but he just got lost and ended up here. I noticed that he seemed extremely embarrassed and many of the hostesses felt the same way, so as you can imagine we all began saying “I get lost all the time too” or “I cannot go anywhere without my GPS because I never know where I am, so do not worry”. I did not notice at the time but according to Wood this type of speech “establishes equality between people” (Wood, 128).
Linking my work again to the text I find how important physical appearance really is to society. In a bullet point on page 150 it talks about if an employee gained more than 10% of her hiring then she would be suspended and fired if the weight was not lost. Reading this I felt very shocked but then I realized that the importance of physical appearance in the workplace is prevalent; however, maybe not to that extent. One day at my workplace I showed up not wearing any makeup because I was coming straight to class and simply did not have any time to apply makeup. When I got into the restaurant about fifteen minutes into my shift one of the managers asked me why I did not have any makeup on because it made me look un-professional; I explained and the issue was dropped. However, I was not the first and will not be the last girl who gets questioned about her appearance and as a result, and I do not know why, I always feel as if I am only there to look pretty.
Within these chapters Woods describes how verbal and nonverbal communication reflects cultural views on gender. She states that “the language we learn and use both reflects and reinforces cultural views and values (118).” The male generic language excludes women with words such as businessman, spokesman, mailman, and mankind. Spotlighting, the practice of highlighting a person’s sex, is discouraged due to it making the assumption that men are considered the standard where women are the exception. Women are defined by their looks or their relationship with others and men are defined by their activities, accomplishments, or positions. Wood gives an example of how female athletes’ appearance is discussed more than their athletic skills. Whether it is their wardrobe, the outfit they choose to wear, or a new hairstyle. With male athletes the focus is on their abilities. Even in situations of rape a victim’s appearance or description of dress is brought up. Women are described as passive when it comes to having sex with phrases like “He screwed her,” “She got laid,” and “He made love to her.” I guess women aren’t initiators when it comes to sex or take no part. Even when a woman doesn’t marry she is given names like spinster or old maid and men get bachelor. Language shapes the awareness of gender issues. Sexual harassment was frequent but had gone undisciplined and unrecognized because it was unnamed and therefore not visible or salient.
ReplyDeleteNonverbal communication has three primary functions to supplement verbal communication, to regulate interaction, and to convey the bulk of the relationship level of meaning. Women are defined socially as deferential, decorative, and relationship-centered. It is reinforced by emphasizing appearance, limiting their space, and defines them as touchable. Men are defined as independent, in control, and powerful. This is emphasized with large territories and greater normative rights to touch others, mainly women, and invade their space. Women speak softly, condense themselves, and display responsive facial expressions. Men are more likely to command space and volume, defend their turf, and give off little facial expressions to resist displaying emotion and keep feelings camouflaged.
Male generic language excludes women. Some people don’t see the problem with using these nouns and pronouns because they think it’s just politically correct. Our language and the technique of how we speak to each other is different between men and women. After reading these two chapters it really made me think about some things that I never would have because they’ve always come natural from how I was raised, for example letting my mom know the “mailman” already came.
ReplyDelete“Language continues to devalue females and femininity”. There are so many different terms that are used that diminish women. Women are sometimes described in trivializing terms that put women down. Women’s clothing is different than men’s and more revealing, but that’s no reason to diminish women and make them feel bad about themselves. If a woman is sexually active and has more than one partner she could be called a whore or a slut (demeaning), but if the tables were turned and a man has more then one partner he’s given props for being such a ladies man.
Proxemics refers to space. If you look at the amount of space you have whether it’s in your home, your car, or in your office you will notice that the more space you have the more “wealthy your considered” or it can show how much “power” you have at work. When we look at physical appearance we realize that both sexes are pressured to meet current ideals of physical appearance. Women seem to have the constant struggle of not being thin enough, and if you look around you in the media you can see why they feel the constant pressure to look thinner and prettier. Men aren’t “immune” to this concept either. Men tend to feel the need to be more buff and lift weights, and if you look back in their childhood’s it’s no wonder they feel this pressure with the presence of GI JOE action figures who are bulk and have six packs. Girls and women are more likely to be unhappy with their appearance than boys and men are.