communication and gender differences

Discussions on behavioral ecology, evolutionary psychology, neurology, endocrinology, game theory, etc.

Re: communication and gender differences

Postby Serpent on October 2nd, 2016, 4:50 pm 

Athena » October 2nd, 2016, 1:33 pm wrote:First, I was trying to get permission to be feminine and not like a man.

Why?? Were you raised in Saudi Arabia or someplace? You don't need anyone's permission to take whatever damn character, persona, style, point of view or position you want. Whatever you choose, some people won't like it. So what?
Second, I found research explaining the gender difference in communication.

They are many and various, but none are an excuse for a free pass on factual inaccuracy, ambiguity, bad manners or bad grammar. Particularly on the subject of science, I've seen some female posters persist in quasi spiritual gobbledygook, very much like religious obscurantists; they really shouldn't be surprised if science nerds dismiss them in the same way. These days, science gets enough flak from creationists and budget-cutters that the insiders get a little protective, intolerant of fairies at the bottom of their garden and stern with the line-blurring likes of me.
Third, I saw a post from mtbturtle resulting from her being offended and wanting action taken, and that is the first time I thought mtbturtle must be a female, because the reason for that communication was the female purpose.

Well, that's not very fair! There are lots of male whiners. It's not unheard-of for male posters to provoke and annoy other posters until they get an angry response and then complain that somebody's angry with them. There was even a name and cartoon for this type in a very funny internet bestiary, but I lost my link in the last-but-one Microsoft crash.

ETA Do, please, look at the feedback section. I just did. I had no idea!
When the purpose of her communication was clearly the female purpose, I could identify her as female, and being able to do was the result of reading the research.

I see. Well that clears up a mystery. You followed a train of logical connections. Though the conclusion wouldn't hold up in court, the inference is understandable.

... And I suspect when women become educated and have careers they become more and more as men because our brains are pliable and the neuron pathways we use the most become the strongest. That is why I used the term "domestic female". If we are studying math and science and then using this information in a career, our neural pathways are going to be completely different from the women who sacrifices herself to be the extension of her hushand's and children's needs and wants. Different social positions, different neurological development.

So then, the gender differences are not necessarily innate or permanent? Might it be true, also, that men who are educated and employed in education, social work or service industries become more verbal, more communicative and more receptive to another person's communication? For example, a doctor of any sex could never become a good diagnostician without learning to interpret tone, expression, body language and hand gestures. Nobody can be a good child-care worker who didn't develop an ear for the barely comprehensible lisp and chirp of three-year-olds.
Recognizing that degree of brain-adjustment would put much of your assumption-base out of date. Women have been in higher education, the general work-force and the world for a century now - that's four or five generations, each in greater numbers than the one before. They have been in executive, supervisory and high-profile leadership positions for the last two generations, in increasing numbers; in the last 30 years or so, they have had a considerable presence in the hard sciences, police and armed forces. They're not handmaidens, second-raters or beggars at the gate anymore!
The bad news is, there is a heavy backlash in some places - which includes the US.

There was a time when I thought it very important to hide my gender because I was sure men are taken more seriously than women.

In some places, that's still true. In some situations and on some topics. It also works the other way, though: some women assume that they alone can address equal rights issues, or gender bias, or laws pertaining to either. Some women righteously maintain that no man is entitled to so much of an opinion on "women's issues." Yet, these are social issues that affect everyone, and in which we all have some stake, whether as part of the problem, part of the solution, bystanders, villains, victims or fallout.

I have read, when we transitioned from picture writing to letters, male dominance was increased because of the different demand on neurons.

I would like to know the rationale for that assertion. And by whom it was made, for what purpose.
In my era, females have been equally successful as artists, musicians and writers, translators and archeologists: they seem to have no problem making the transition from visual to symbolic, concrete to abstract, one language to another - and back again.

I suppose I could look for research that supports or opposes what was said in a book about language and gender dominance,

Look to the politics. It's power that forms language, not the other way around.
You should watch this series http://www.ascentofwoman.com/I think you'd benefit from it. I don't say "like", because much of it is horrifying.

Oh yes, I see a difference and wonder why some women appear more aware of the difference than men? However, I suspect a modern career woman would not.

Then let all the women become modern. And all the men, too. In fact, the sooner we get over judging one another on these superficial classifications, the later the world goes to hell in a handcart.
Then, they can work out who has a career and who does not, according to the needs and temper of each household.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2531
Joined: 24 Dec 2011
BioWizard liked this post


Re: communication and gender differences

Postby Athena on October 2nd, 2016, 8:53 pm 

Serpent » October 2nd, 2016, 2:50 pm wrote:
Athena » October 2nd, 2016, 1:33 pm wrote:First, I was trying to get permission to be feminine and not like a man.

Why?? Were you raised in Saudi Arabia or someplace? You don't need anyone's permission to take whatever damn character, persona, style, point of view or position you want. Whatever you choose, some people won't like it. So what?
Second, I found research explaining the gender difference in communication.

They are many and various, but none are an excuse for a free pass on factual inaccuracy, ambiguity, bad manners or bad grammar. Particularly on the subject of science, I've seen some female posters persist in quasi spiritual gobbledygook, very much like religious obscurantists; they really shouldn't be surprised if science nerds dismiss them in the same way. These days, science gets enough flak from creationists and budget-cutters that the insiders get a little protective, intolerant of fairies at the bottom of their garden and stern with the line-blurring likes of me.
Third, I saw a post from mtbturtle resulting from her being offended and wanting action taken, and that is the first time I thought mtbturtle must be a female, because the reason for that communication was the female purpose.

Well, that's not very fair! There are lots of male whiners. It's not unheard-of for male posters to provoke and annoy other posters until they get an angry response and then complain that somebody's angry with them. There was even a name and cartoon for this type in a very funny internet bestiary, but I lost my link in the last-but-one Microsoft crash.

ETA Do, please, look at the feedback section. I just did. I had no idea!
When the purpose of her communication was clearly the female purpose, I could identify her as female, and being able to do was the result of reading the research.

I see. Well that clears up a mystery. You followed a train of logical connections. Though the conclusion wouldn't hold up in court, the inference is understandable.

... And I suspect when women become educated and have careers they become more and more as men because our brains are pliable and the neuron pathways we use the most become the strongest. That is why I used the term "domestic female". If we are studying math and science and then using this information in a career, our neural pathways are going to be completely different from the women who sacrifices herself to be the extension of her hushand's and children's needs and wants. Different social positions, different neurological development.

So then, the gender differences are not necessarily innate or permanent? Might it be true, also, that men who are educated and employed in education, social work or service industries become more verbal, more communicative and more receptive to another person's communication? For example, a doctor of any sex could never become a good diagnostician without learning to interpret tone, expression, body language and hand gestures. Nobody can be a good child-care worker who didn't develop an ear for the barely comprehensible lisp and chirp of three-year-olds.
Recognizing that degree of brain-adjustment would put much of your assumption-base out of date. Women have been in higher education, the general work-force and the world for a century now - that's four or five generations, each in greater numbers than the one before. They have been in executive, supervisory and high-profile leadership positions for the last two generations, in increasing numbers; in the last 30 years or so, they have had a considerable presence in the hard sciences, police and armed forces. They're not handmaidens, second-raters or beggars at the gate anymore!
The bad news is, there is a heavy backlash in some places - which includes the US.

There was a time when I thought it very important to hide my gender because I was sure men are taken more seriously than women.

In some places, that's still true. In some situations and on some topics. It also works the other way, though: some women assume that they alone can address equal rights issues, or gender bias, or laws pertaining to either. Some women righteously maintain that no man is entitled to so much of an opinion on "women's issues." Yet, these are social issues that affect everyone, and in which we all have some stake, whether as part of the problem, part of the solution, bystanders, villains, victims or fallout.

I have read, when we transitioned from picture writing to letters, male dominance was increased because of the different demand on neurons.

I would like to know the rationale for that assertion. And by whom it was made, for what purpose.
In my era, females have been equally successful as artists, musicians and writers, translators and archeologists: they seem to have no problem making the transition from visual to symbolic, concrete to abstract, one language to another - and back again.

I suppose I could look for research that supports or opposes what was said in a book about language and gender dominance,

Look to the politics. It's power that forms language, not the other way around.
You should watch this series http://www.ascentofwoman.com/I think you'd benefit from it. I don't say "like", because much of it is horrifying.

Oh yes, I see a difference and wonder why some women appear more aware of the difference than men? However, I suspect a modern career woman would not.

Then let all the women become modern. And all the men, too. In fact, the sooner we get over judging one another on these superficial classifications, the later the world goes to hell in a handcart.
Then, they can work out who has a career and who does not, according to the needs and temper of each household.


Serpent, I think those questions need to go in another thread because they appear to be more about my position on the issue than the science.
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: communication and gender differences

Postby Serpent on October 2nd, 2016, 9:19 pm 

The science. Okay.
Is there a single, uncontested science that covers this difference? Do the criteria used encompass all cultures and time periods? Is there an absolute, measurable quality or attribute that is gender-specific, and remains fixed in different circumstances?
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2531
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: communication and gender differences

Postby Athena on October 3rd, 2016, 10:14 am 

Serpent » October 2nd, 2016, 7:19 pm wrote:The science. Okay.
Is there a single, uncontested science that covers this difference? Do the criteria used encompass all cultures and time periods? Is there an absolute, measurable quality or attribute that is gender-specific, and remains fixed in different circumstances?


Universally women tend to have higher voices than men, and deep voices tend to get more respect from children and adults. I would expect men to notice the difference size and deep versus a high voice makes. Physical differences equal communication and relationship differences.

I have opened a thread in the philosophy side of the forum that more fully answers your question. It is my hope we can discuss the subject less formally there.

viewtopic.php?f=51&t=31575
Athena
Banned User
 
Posts: 1936
Joined: 22 Apr 2012
Location: Eugene, Oregon


Re: communication and gender differences

Postby Serpent on October 3rd, 2016, 11:13 am 

Athena » October 3rd, 2016, 9:14 am wrote:
Serpent » October 2nd, 2016, 7:19 pm wrote:The science. Okay.
Is there a single, uncontested science that covers this difference? Do the criteria used encompass all cultures and time periods? Is there an absolute, measurable quality or attribute that is gender-specific, and remains fixed in different circumstances?


Universally women tend to have higher voices than men, and deep voices tend to get more respect from children and adults. I would expect men to notice the difference size and deep versus a high voice makes. Physical differences equal communication and relationship differences.
All irrelevant to internet forums, or any other written communication. Besides, we don't have any children here, and we don't need intimidation to get our points across. (It's not the pitch of voice kids respect: they're more afraid of the parent that hits sooner.)
I thought the audio component had been dealt-with already.

I thought this was supposed to be about the style and purpose of communication.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2531
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: communication and gender differences

Postby Braininvat on October 3rd, 2016, 12:13 pm 

You all are welcome to keep going on this thread. As I pointed out elsewhere, sometimes if there is no research on a question, it's okay to suggest a new hypothesis as a basis for new research, and offer it in a speculative way. The Behavioral Sci thread has always been a bit looser, seems to me.

I will issue one tiny moderator caution to Serpent - in your otherwise insightful post you say,

Particularly on the subject of science, I've seen some female posters persist in quasi spiritual gobbledygook, very much like religious obscurantists; they really shouldn't be surprised if science nerds dismiss them in the same way.


You should be clear here. Are you really saying one gender waxes more mystical/nutty than the other? I don't think this was meant ad hominem, but it teetered perilously on the edge, and could be read that way. Sigh. This does seem like a topic where everyone has to be on their best behavior.

Am busy this week, so hope others mods can help this thread along, if it needs it. Or people can "self moderate" ....hint, hint.
User avatar
Braininvat
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5763
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills
BadgerJelly liked this post


Re: communication and gender differences

Postby Serpent on October 3rd, 2016, 12:24 pm 

Braininvat » October 3rd, 2016, 11:13 am wrote:[Particularly on the subject of science, I've seen some female posters persist in quasi spiritual gobbledygook, very much like religious obscurantists; they really shouldn't be surprised if science nerds dismiss them in the same way. ]

You should be clear here. Are you really saying one gender waxes more mystical/nutty than the other? I don't think this was meant ad hominem, but it teetered perilously on the edge, and could be read that way. Sigh. This does seem like a topic where everyone has to be on their best behavior.

Not exactly. The religious mystical nuts more often identify as male according to their handles, while the spiritual mystical nuts identify more often as female. That's not necessarily a true reflection of their gender roles in the walking world. Both types have a habit of taking some concept or catch-phrase from physics and running off madly in some unwarranted direction. The serious science types [more frequently identified as male] usually respond with long, pedantic lectures.
I have a dread of heights. Hate teetering on a perilous edge. But it's a true and honest observation.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2531
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Previous

Return to Behavioral Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest