Rubin's Explanation For The Differences In Communication example essay topic

"The whole goddamn business of what you " re calling intimacy bugs the hell out of me. I never know what you women mean when you talk about it. Karen complains that I don't talk to her, but it's not talk she wants, it's some other damn thing, only I don't know what the hell it is!" This quote from a man interviewed by Lillian Rubin is the perfect example of the differences in communication between men and women. These differences in communication methods of women and men are born of a complex interaction between society and the individual.

Men seem to struggle with intimacy and emotional expression, while women rely on this type of communication causing much struggle between the sexes. Lillian Rubin suggests that intimacy, a form of communication between men and women, itself is an ambiguous or difficult term to define, but asserts that it does embody the idea of the ability to put away a public persona and be cared about or care for the "real person". This alludes to a struggle between the human need for intimacy and that for independence suggested by other sociologists. In addition to this idea of intimacy, Rubin looks deeper into the human psyche and analyzes the different ways in which men and women communicate their emotions.

Rubin explains that while women can easily explain what emotions they are feeling and what has caused these, men struggle to verbalize their feelings and this causes animosities between men and women. Women want men to communicate their emotions while men don't understand why they should or how to go about doing this (Rubin, p. 384-386). Rubin's explanation for the differences in communication is that it stems from societal pressures that encourage men to suppress their emotions, and act "rationally". Men are socialized to believe that acting emotionally like women is not normal.

She states that "this is the single most dispiriting dilemma between women and men". Finally Rubin goes on to suggest that while men can act out anger and frustration inside the family, the expression of fear, dependency, or sadness would expose vulnerability, and is difficult for men to do (Rubin p. 383-388). Another Sociologist, Deborah Tannon, has done research in the differences between communication methods of women and men. She also suggests that conflicting ideas of intimacy and independence plays a critical role in the differing views of communication. Tannon illustrates for the reader a typical scenario of a wife hurt by her husband's lack of consent for a decision he made. The husband sees this type of communication as a sign of his inferiority or lack of independence while the wife feels excluded and hurt.

The alternative views of the same situation illustrate the basic differences in how men and women communicate (Tannon, p. 222-224). This and several other examples given by Tannon, are examples of what she states is balancing a delicate system of communication. She suggests that the problem is that women hold men to their standards of conversational styles, and men hold women to theirs. If each sex attempted to understand, what Rubin suggested, that there are fundamental differences due to biological and societal influences then the lines of communication would be more open between women and men.

Sociologist Karen Walker analyzes communication habits of how men interact and display intimacy within their own gender. She specifically studies men's use of public space, telephone use, jokes, and talk about women. The first aspect of her case study involved men's use of public space. Her findings suggested that men do not make formal plans to meet and socialize in public places although this is the predominant place of interaction. She also noted that at the professional level, men are more likely to have planned social activities in their home.

Next, in her interviews with men about the reason for making telephone calls, it was found that men call for reasons other then talking about personal issues like making plans, or business arrangements, but that the content of the conversation often includes personal and intimate conversation similar to women's phone conversations. Men rarely call for the sole reason of talking about intimate issues. The third aspect of her interviews revealed that often men use jokes as a way to affirm their masculinity and construct boundaries of masculinity and shared social values. In addition these jokes were often used as a linkage to discuss more intimate issues with close male friends. Finally Walker discussed what men say about women. She found that while all men don't talk about women, most do.

The topics mainly included habits of their wives. Walker suggests that this is a way for men to interpret and compare their relationships without discussing it specifically (Walker, p 389-400). Regarding Walkers work, Rubin would suggest that it is the social influences developed from early childhood and reinforced through adulthood that explain the findings of Walkers case study of these men. She would suggest that it would be very difficult for men to break the socially accepted norms, except on rare occasions, to discuss intimate issues in the way women usually do. This explains the need to include other agendas in order to discuss intimate issues. In addition, Tannon would support these findings suggesting men's unwillingness to share information stems from the need of independence.

If they shared emotions, this could reveal feelings of inferiority that are frowned upon in today's society. According Walker, Rubin, and Tannon, changing the way society socializes men and women is the main cause for differences in communication. Although it is true that biologic influences play a small role, in order to build better avenues of communication between men and women, society needs to change the way it view intimacy and interactions between men and women. If these norms are changed then the way men and women communicate will also be able to change.

Bibliography

Rubin, Lillian B. Men's Lives. "The approach Avoidance Dance: Men, Women, and Intimacy". Pearson Education Inc. 6th Ed. 2004.
p. 383 Tannon, Deborah. Reconstructing Gender. "You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation". McGraw Hill Co. 3rd Ed. 2003.
p. 222 Walker, Karen. Men's Lives. "I'm not friends the Way She's Friends: Ideological and Behavioral Constructions of Masculinity in Men's Friendships". Pearson Education Inc. 6th Ed. 2004.