In the article "I'll Explain it to You: Lecturing and Listening", by Deborah Tannen, the main focus of men dominating conversation and women taking the passive role as listener is discussed. Tannen also suggests that both men and women have different listening and response styles in conversation.
Tannen begins by illustrating that men lecture and women listen. She claims that this is because "women seek to build rapport...to play down their expertise," while men tend to "value the position of center stage...they seek opportunities to gather and disseminate information"(390). She states that from her experiences men may still try to dominate the conversation even if they are less knowledgeable then she is on the subject. Tannen found that women respond in an interested and encouraging way to a subject even without a lot of knowledge. Tannen does add that this is not true of all males, but that it is a "male way". To support her observations, Tannen uses a study by psychologist H.M.Leet-Pellegrini. This study was to discover if gender or expertise was a determination of who would behave in a controlling or dominant way. The study showed males did tend to dominate conversations, especially on subjects they knew a lot about. Tannen suggests that this study shows that women really want to know "Do you like me?" whereas men want to know "Do you respect me?".
Tannen discusses that in relation to listening and understanding, both men and women have issues they are unhappy with. She points out that women often have the impression that men are not listening to them because they do not react in the same manner that a woman would. The same is also true for men who feel that they are not being heard. According to anthropologists Maltz and Borker women give more signals that they are listening , such as "yeah", or "uh-uh" and that they respond more positively and agreeably then men. On the opposite end, men give fewer listening signals, make statements instead of questions, and challenge rather then agree. In both cases the speaker expects to receive the same listening signals that they send, but because men and women have different signals, both are unhappy with what they receive.
In the end of the article Tannen points out that many times men
may dominate conversation, and listening can turn into lecturing
because "women listen attentively and do not interrupt with
challenges, sidetracks, or matching information"(400). Tannen
does not blame either sex for being controlling or weak, rather
she notes that it is the "difference between women's and
men's habitual styles"(400). Tannen concludes with an optimistic
"Hope for the future" in which she states women don't
need to continually be the listener and that they need to stop
the belief that they "must wait for the floor to be handed
to them"(401).
The article by Deborah Tannen was one that was very effective and displayed valid issues and points that are not just for feminists, but for anyone who has ever engaged in a conversation. She also helps to give insight into ourselves and the opposite sex.
The article is effective it can be used and understood by anyone, no matter their sex or level of knowledge on the topic. This is because Tannen uses conversation scenarios that everyone can relate to. With these examples she describes her surroundings, all those people involved in the conversation, and how the conversation progresses. She then points out various ways in which these conversations generally turn in relation to which sex is involved. These are situations everyone has been in at one time or another, which helps the reader be involved in the article because they can apply it to themselves. Tannen does not blame either sex for being controlling or weak minded; rather, she points out observations that she has found to be true in both sexes. Tannen gives men equal time in her article to allow their opinions on conversation to be heard as well as women. This makes the article one that both men and women could read without being offended by a biased writer. In all of these observations, no real direction is given as to possible solutions or advice for change. This is because Tannen gives the insight that both sexes may have lacked of each other , and leaves it for them to decide what they want to do with it. That is why this article is really a learning tool for both sexes.
One problem with Tannen's article was that the information included in the study by Elizabeth Aries about the body language of young women did not follow the topic.
As a whole, Deborah Tannen's article uses everyday examples
in conversation to convey understanding and knowledge to both
sexes. She gives this information as a tool for learning and
understanding in a way that any person can use in their daily
life.
© Erin Campbell, 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.