Feminist Steinem examines an existing belief of psychologists that personality is the key factor in how people chose to communicate and talk. She uses previous research based on mixed and single-sex groups that examines "conversational style as a function of power and environment." She addresses three conceptions of women and men: women talk more, women are 'gossips,' men enjoy all-male groups, and physiological differences inhibit women's vocal tones.
Popular beliefs focusing on women's level of talk-time conclude that women talk more than men. In a study done by Dale Spender, she discovered that women's time talking incorporates question-asking, topic starters, or interest tags. Steinem adds that the possible misconception stems from women who talk outside of the female norm and get blamed for usurping talk-time. Steinem suggests reversing roles (violate male-female norms in conversation), addressing the subject of talk-time, and monitoring one's own behavior to broaden understanding.
The second conception Steinem addresses is speaking in groups. Women tend to be defined as 'gossips' in their socialization patterns and men as desiring only to speak in all-male groups. Elizabeth Aries found women were less likely to talk about themselves; rather, they would discuss relationships. Men tended to speak more of themselves (gossip) and to generalize their personal experiences. In mixed groups, women tended to interact more with males than females. Practical advice from Steinem includes taking notes during group time and countering men's generalities with examples.
The last conception is that deeper voices are more appealing, and women do not have the ability to develop lower voices. Steinem attaches this to learned behavior. Spender found that some deaf boys grew up without experiencing a change in voice, implying it is learned behavior. Ruth Bend studied intonation patterns and found that both men and women possess four patterns; however, men only chose to use three, ignoring the highest. Steinem offers the observation that women may now be adapting to the masculine monotone to fit a designated norm.
Steinem concludes by saying it is radical to attack the politics
of talking. Addressing it will begin to push out individual behavior
and force it to be understood by others.
Gloria Steinem breaks some of the standards of writing in her article. Her argument is well structured and logical but she did not summarize what she was going to say in the beginning. She instead broke up the article into different sections. Each section started with a question that severed as thesis statement. She answers those questions effectively using very convincing studies done on how women and men talk. She includes her own interpretations of those studies.
Steinem says that change is required from both sexes. She believes communication is the way to come to an understanding between the sexes. Talking should not be a struggle but a cooperative effort instead.
The author does displays many biases towards women. The author assumes that women are primarily passive, good listeners, and empathetic. Men are portrayed as being aggressive, pushy, and impersonal. Most of her advice on how to communicate better is designed for women. However the article was published in Ms. Magazine and its primary audience is female feminists.
Steinem attempts to dispel stereotypes about women. For example she attacks the myth that women talk more than men. The study she mentions shows that men talk more. She follows this same pattern several times throughout the article. Her evidence is sound and does its job. Although by doing this she is replacing one stereotype with another. The tendency to stereotype should be discouraged not reinforced. If stereotype is the opposite of what is considered typical sexism, it is still sexism. Sexism is generalizations based on gender. This is true whether these stereotypes are about women or men, complimentary or insulting, hindering or helpful. If the feminist movement (or any equality movement) is to achieve its goal, it must work on thinning the lines between groups rather than darkening them.
Gloria Steinem focuses on creating an awareness of the differences between men and women in interactionand communication. Because she does not blame men for the misconceptions she addresses, she avoids the victimization of women. Instead, she defines the misconceptions, supports her refutations, and gently suggests methods to increase understanding. Steinem refers to the mutual understanding in saying that men are meeting in consciousness-raising groups and attempting to communicate more openly among themselves, while "many women are trying to be more honest and effective toward men by analyzing the barriers we ourselves maintain."
With a well-defined audience of Ms. magazine, Steinem calls attention to common issues. It reaches to the feminists of the eighties that are searching for proof of their beliefs, which Steinem implies they are stumbling over. She says, "Only women's own meetings and truth-telling began to confirm what we had thought each of us was alone in experiencing...."
The studies used to refute previous conceptions were conducted by well-renowned feminist researchers. The reference list, including Dale Spender, Elizabeth Aries, Cheris Kramarae, and Pamela Fishman, illustrates a number of frequently published researchers. Printed in 1981, Steinem's article followed the publication of Dale Spender's Man Made Language. At the time, this piece offered a liberal assertion regarding women's communication styles.
Steinem widens her scope and addresses a broad audience by giving simple conversational suggestions. These suggestions can be pursued at varying levels (with varying purposes) allowing readers to challenge themselves to acquire awareness. She suggests being inattentive or interrupting when a person is dominating a conversation. If men are usurping class discussion, she says, acknowledge its occurrence. She also suggests videotaping an interaction and viewing the differences in styles, taking note of who talks and what is said.
Steinem attempts to meet, match, and challenge each mind in her audience. She pushes usage of neutral word choice. "What are some practical steps toward achieving this?" Phrased as such, she avoids blaming men and victimizing women. Instead, it allows for a mutual effort to create understanding. In attempting to rise to the various knowledge levels of her audience, Steinem is both blatant and discrete. Her title refers to talking in groups, while the paper's primary focus seems to be about misconceptions of communication over a broader perspective. Each of the three sections of her paper begin with conceptions phrased in question form. To an average reader, it is an easy outline to follow. To a knowledgeable feminist, it is a collection of thoughts to support and build on.
Steinem's final words re-address the issue and the future of understanding communication differences. She recognizes that feminist attacks on the politics of talking will not be well-received beyond a feminist public. Yet her desire is to create an awareness, whether responses be positive or negative, and to force people out of the conception that talking and communicating are merely part of our personality. She asserts, "its form demands that we be accepted and understood as our whole selves." Over fifteen years later, our culture is still attempting to change our perceptions of communication differences between men and women.
© Heather Docken & Nathaniel Wilson, Winona (MN) State University, 30 January 1997. This document may be freely distributed for educational use as long as this notice of its authorship accompanies its distribution.
Return to annotated bibliography on language, gender, and writing.