8/14/2019 Theories of Gender Communication

1/2

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 across c lt ral /or!at. 0o!en se ra ort tal to esta'lish !eaning/ l connection $ithothers, $hile !en se re ort tal to gain stat s in relation to others. -eca se $o!en and!en se lang age di//erently, annen s ggests they are s ea ing di//erent dialects, orgenderlects . he goal o/ genderlect theory is to ac no$ledge and a reciate the lang age o/the o osite se2 and achieve ! t al res ect and nderstanding. (Se!iotic and socio c lt raltraditions) 3enderlect theory is eval ated on the 'ac o/ this age.

Tenet Clarification

0hy 0e Co!! nicate: 0o!en seeconnection, !en see stat s.

0o!en engage in co!! nication to ' ildand !aintain relationshi s $ith others. -ycontrast, !en are !ore li ely to engage intal only $hen it !a es the! loo good,strong, co! etitive, or inde endent.

Style o/ Co!! nicating: 0o!en se ra orttal , !en se re ort tal .

0o!en e2 ress e!otions, share ersonal/eelings, relate stories, and listene! athically (ra ort tal ). %en engage inco! etitive 4o ing and assertive s eech that$ins control o/ the conversation (re ort tal ).

5ang age: 0e s ea the sa!e lang age, ' teach gender has its o$n dialect.

6ach gender has its o$n set o/ voca' laryand re/erred to ics, and they se s o enlang age di//erently: !en tal to get thingsdone (instr !ental a roach)7 $o!en tal tointeract $ith others (relational a roach).

3oal o/ 3enderlect heory: % t al res ectand nderstanding.

In contrast to /e!inist vie$ oints thatcritici8e !en /or in/erior co!! nication thatre resses $o!en, 3enderlect heory si! lyidenti/ies the di//erences 'et$een s andenco rages s to ac no$ledge and acce t theco!! nicative c lt re o/ the other.

8/14/2019 Theories of Gender Communication

2/2

o $hat e2tent does 3enderlect heory !eet the criteria /or a good inter retive theory

*oes it lead to a dee er nderstanding o/ eo le -eca se this theory reveals ho$!en and $o!en s 'conscio sly co!! nicate in di//erent $ays, it sho$s ho$ easy itis /or all o/ s to !is4 dge the $ords and actions o/ others.

*oes it engender clari/ication o/ val es his theory ro!otes ! t al res ect andnderstanding 'y sho$ing that co!! nicators sho ld a reciate and res ect the style

o/ co!! nication o/ 'oth genders.

*oes it have aesthetic a eal 3enderlect theory has niversal a eal 'eca se $e canall identi/y $ith the /r strations and !is nderstandings o/ co!! nicating acrossgenders.

Has it generated a co!! nity o/ agree!ent his theory has 'een $idely acce ted 'ythe o lar ress, ' t a relatively s!all n !'er o/ Co!! nication scholars ta e thistheory 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/ society 0e can all i! rove in this

area. Co! etent co!! nicators $ho nderstand and a reciate 'oth sides o/ genderco!! nication can 'eco!e !ore e//ective (!ini!i8ing !is nderstanding) and !orea ro riate (socially acce ta'le) as $e ada t to the contrasting styles o/ the othergender.

Standpoint Theory Sandra Harding and Julia Wood

e!inist stand oint theorists s ggest that $o!en are nderadvantaged, and th s !en areoveradvantaged. Otherness is engendered in $o!en 'y the $ay !en res ond to the!.*i//erent locations $ithin the social hierarchy a//ect $hat is seen. he stand oints o/

!arginali8ed eo le rovide less /alse vie$s o/ the $orld than do the rivileged ers ectiveso/ the o$er/ l. Strong o'4ectivity re; ires that scienti/ic research start /ro! the lives o/$o!en, the oor, gays and les'ians, and racial !inorities. (Critical tradition7 see Ch. 6ach erson can achieve only aartial vie$ o/ reality /ro! the ers ective o/ his or her o$n osition in the social hierarchy?

(Harding). > he social gro s $ithin $hich $e are located o$er/ lly sha e $hat $ee2 erience and no$ 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/ o$er7 eo le $ith little clo t have tro 'le giving voice totheir erce tions. &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 $ords and the nor!s /or their se have 'een /or! lated 'y the do!inantgro , !en? ( ra!arae). %an !ade lang age aids in de/ining, de reciating, and e2cl ding$o!en. &s $o!en cease to 'e ! ted, !en $ill no longer !aintain their osition o/do!inance in society. (Critical tradition7 see Ch.