Theories of Gender Communication

Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from womens lives . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. ra!arae, C. (19"1). Women and men speaking. #o$ley, %&: Ne$'(ry Ho(se. )annen, *. (199+). You just dont understand. Ne$ Yor,: -allantine.

Genderlect Theory Deborah Tannen )annen 'elieves that the 'est $ay to descri'e co!!(nication 'et$een the genders is in a cross.c(lt(ral /or!at. 0o!en (se ra11ort tal, to esta'lish !eaning/(l connection $ith others, $hile !en (se re1ort tal, to gain stat(s in relation to others. -eca(se $o!en and !en (se lang(age di//erently, )annen s(ggests they are s1ea,ing di//erent dialects, or genderlects. )he goal o/ genderlect theory is to ac,no$ledge and a11reciate the lang(age o/ the o11osite se2 and achieve !(t(al res1ect and (nderstanding. (Se!iotic and socio.c(lt(ral traditions) 3enderlect theory is eval(ated on the 'ac, o/ this 1age. Tenet 0hy 0e Co!!(nicate: 0o!en see, connection, !en see, stat(s. Clarification 0o!en engage in co!!(nication to '(ild and !aintain relationshi1s $ith others. -y contrast, !en are !ore li,ely to engage in tal, only $hen it !a,es the! loo, good, strong, co!1etitive, or inde1endent. 0o!en e21ress e!otions, share 1ersonal /eelings, relate stories, and listen e!1athically (ra11ort tal,). %en engage in co!1etitive 4o,ing and assertive s1eech that $ins control o/ the conversation (re1ort tal,). 6ach gender has its o$n set o/ voca'(lary and 1re/erred to1ics, and they (se s1o,en lang(age di//erently: !en tal, to get things done (instr(!ental a11roach)7 $o!en tal, to interact $ith others (relational a11roach). In contrast to /e!inist vie$1oints that critici8e !en /or in/erior co!!(nication that re1resses $o!en, 3enderlect )heory si!1ly identi/ies the di//erences 'et$een (s and enco(rages (s to ac,no$ledge and acce1t the co!!(nicative c(lt(re o/ the other.

Style o/ Co!!(nicating: 0o!en (se ra11ort tal,, !en (se re1ort tal,.

5ang(age: 0e s1ea, the sa!e lang(age, '(t each gender has its o$n dialect.

3oal o/ 3enderlect )heory: %(t(al res1ect and (nderstanding.

)o $hat e2tent does 3enderlect )heory !eet the criteria /or a good inter1retive theory9 *oes it lead to a dee1er (nderstanding o/ 1eo1le9 -eca(se this theory reveals ho$ !en and $o!en s('conscio(sly co!!(nicate in di//erent $ays, it sho$s ho$ easy it is /or all o/ (s to !is4(dge the $ords and actions o/ others. *oes it engender clari/ication o/ val(es9 )his theory 1ro!otes !(t(al res1ect and (nderstanding 'y sho$ing that co!!(nicators sho(ld a11reciate and res1ect the style o/ co!!(nication o/ 'oth genders. *oes it have aesthetic a11eal9 3enderlect theory has (niversal a11eal 'eca(se $e can all identi/y $ith the /r(strations and !is(nderstandings o/ co!!(nicating across genders. Has it generated a co!!(nity o/ agree!ent9 )his theory has 'een $idely acce1ted 'y the 1o1(lar 1ress, '(t a relatively s!all n(!'er o/ Co!!(nication scholars ta,e this theory serio(sly eno(gh to (se it as a gro(nding theory /or /(rther research. *oes it call /or or contri'(te to a re/or!ation o/ society9 0e can all i!1rove in this area. Co!1etent co!!(nicators $ho (nderstand and a11reciate 'oth sides o/ gender co!!(nication can 'eco!e !ore e//ective (!ini!i8ing !is(nderstanding) and !ore a11ro1riate (socially acce1ta'le) as $e ada1t to the contrasting styles o/ the other gender.

Standpoint Theory Sandra Harding and Julia Wood :e!inist stand1oint theorists s(ggest that $o!en are (nderadvantaged, and th(s !en are overadvantaged. Otherness is engendered in $o!en 'y the $ay !en res1ond to the!. *i//erent locations $ithin the social hierarchy a//ect $hat is seen. )he stand1oints o/ !arginali8ed 1eo1le 1rovide less /alse vie$s o/ the $orld than do the 1rivileged 1ers1ectives o/ the 1o$er/(l. Strong o'4ectivity re;(ires that scienti/ic research start /ro! the lives o/ $o!en, the 1oor, gays and les'ians, and racial !inorities. (Critical tradition7 see Ch. <=) & c(lt(re is not e21erienced identically 'y all !e!'ers. >6ach 1erson can achieve only a 1artial vie$ o/ reality /ro! the 1ers1ective o/ his or her o$n 1osition in the social hierarchy? (Harding). >)he social gro(1s $ithin $hich $e are located 1o$er/(lly sha1e $hat $e e21erience and ,no$ as $ell as ho$ $e (nderstand and co!!(nicate $ith o(rselves, others, and the $orld? (0ood). Muted Group Theory Cheris Kramarae %(tedness is d(e to the lac, o/ 1o$er7 1eo1le $ith little clo(t have tro('le giving voice to their 1erce1tions. &s a res(lt, they are overloo,ed, !(//led, and rendered invisi'le. >0o!en are not as /ree or as a'le as !en are to say $hat they $ish, $hen and $here they $ish, 'eca(se the $ords and the nor!s /or their (se have 'een /or!(lated 'y the do!inant gro(1, !en? ( ra!arae). %an.!ade lang(age aids in de/ining, de1reciating, and e2cl(ding $o!en. &s $o!en cease to 'e !(ted, !en $ill no longer !aintain their 1osition o/ do!inance in society. (Critical tradition7 see Ch. <@)