“Feminist communication theory...begins with the goals of understanding and explaining gender, refusing to accept stock answers and unchallenged common-sense assumptions. Feminist communication theory begins with an assumption that we are in need of deep structural change to produce new social relations and just societies." Feminist communication theory theorizes gender, communication, and social change. Genderlect Theory views communication between men and women through a humanistic and scientific approach, stating that the differences between the communication styles that women and men use are cultural. Genderlect Theory claims that men are more concerned with power while women focus on connections, leading to "cross-cultural" misunderstandings between the sexes. An example of this difference that a supporter of Genderlect Theory may believe would be how men and women think about personal relationships with the opposite sex and how they talk about their problems in different ways. However, Genderlect Theory claims that men view the world through the lens of hierarchy and that women are only concerned with making connections. Do you believe this to be true? I myself have known plenty of men who think about or view relationships just as the women they are dating do, and miscommunications arise from personality differences, not miscommunications. I believe that Feminist communication theory relates to Genderlect Theory because I believe Genderlect Theory to be categorizing women and communication, using stereotypes to form the theory, which is what Feminist communication theorists strive to avoid.
Here is an example from the movie "He's Just Not That Into You" which tries to show how differently women and men think about relationships, which would support the Genderlect Theory if it were true:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJBUj-iF4Tg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m19MuX02mUw&feature=related
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
i agree that Genderlect theory doesn't seem to leave room for separate personality. Honestly at first I was thinking, ah finally a way to understand their language, their being women, and I do think it can be helpful, but it is a bit to general to encompass all men and women. It is amazing how much opposition there is to the theory which is understandable gender theory of any kind are a touchy subject, bu there is a part of me that wants to investigate the genderflect theory and see if it is there in my life. I think i do understand it as far as report vs rapport, and I can look to examples in my life of that. I found it pretty easy in my examples so I'm not ready to say it doesn't exist and isn't applicable. i think it is, or certain parts of it are.
ReplyDeleteHaving read the chapter and watching the clips, I do think that there is validity in the theory and much of it probably does happen. But I think this theory lacks depth and is very general. Like Brian said, I see examples of the theory being true in my relationships and the relationships around me, but once again I can't fully agree since the theory is so generic and doesn't or can't apply to the individual.
ReplyDeleteGenderlect Theory claims that men view the world through the lens of hierarchy and that women are only concerned with making connections. Do you believe this to be true?
ReplyDeleteI do not believe this to be true at all. Like you said, Genderlect theory seems to use stereotypes to form its basis. Deborah Tanning is ridiculous. I found it funny that she regards sensitivity training as an effort to teach men how to speak in a feminine voice. She states when men are listening they avoid putting themselves in a submissive or one-down, stance. I like to think when I am listening to someone that I am not trying to be the alpha male and always in a dominant stance. Tanning also says that in private conversation women tend to talk more. In my relationship that is completely opposite. The one critique that I like for the theory is perhaps using selective data is the only way to support a reductionist claim that women are one way and men are another. Tanning’s theory is very selective.
These clips are good examples of how Tannen believes women seek human connection more than anything else. While I don't necessarily agree with everything Tannen says, it does seem like this is often true. In the first clip posted, we see young lady who is anxious to hear back from a man she recently went on a date with. She is concerned with the type of connection they have made and is excited to see if he called back. The man, on the other hand, is calling her back while he's calling other dates back as well. By making a mistake and calling her by her wrong name, he is exemplifying the idea represented in griffin. The man is basically calling several women back so that he can go out with them all again at some point. This action represents his need to command attention and be seen as a man who can readily go out with women. Essentially, this represents his status. Drew Barrymore's character is much more concerned with whether or not one guy calls her back and likes her. She seems like she badly wants to make some sort of connection with this man and continue to date. The man's interest in dating as well as his credibility goes out the window, though, when he mistakenly leaves the second message.
ReplyDelete