Women of CAA, I have a question.

[Tsukuyomi]

It's true that 'often' girls talk about nothing and us guys have a hard time listening in that sense, but if they say something of value we listen.
Don't we?

I would hhpe so o.o

The same can go for us women :-?

[Raiden no Kishi]

It's true that 'often' girls talk about nothing and us guys have a hard time listening in that sense, but if they say something of value we listen.
Don't we?

I don't think that's entirely fair. I think it has to do with differing standards of value. Neither are necessarily preferable.

.rai//

[Kaligraphic]

Actually, one big reason for the communication divide is that men and women speak on entirely different levels. The way men operate is we either think or feel, but not at the same time on a single subject. We separate the factual from the emotional. We define reality and relationship separately. To us, communication is a way of exchanging information. When our girl asks "are you thirsty?" while on a long drive, our thought pattern goes (question-thirst?)->(body-no)->(mouth-"Nope, not thirsty.").

Women, though, operate on both levels at the same time, merging what we men keep separate. To them, a thought, and therefore a communication, has both a logical and an emotional component. When they ask "Are you thirsty?", they may be deciding whether or not they are thirsty themselves, and, because of how women perceive relationship, a man's statement of "No, I'm not thirsty." may mean to the woman "I don't care if you are thirsty.", because it cuts off the decision process for them.

This is also why women may infer anger or lack of feeling in a man, based off of the lack of emotional content in his communication. If a woman cares for a man, she'll want reassurance that he cares for her - thus the classic "how do I look?". It's phrased as a factual question, because the female mind tends to determine facts based on relationship. So affection is expected to translate to a positive response and disaffection a negative response. The male mind, of course, naturally thinks of the factual response, because guys hear it as a factual question.

Don't believe me that the feminine mind bases facts on relationship? Look at young girls who are close friends. Listen to then talk about something. Often, one will say, for example, something like "My mother has a pink dress.", to which the other will say "My mother has a pink dress too.", even though it isn't true. This is because the pink dress is irrelevant to the actual communication - it is friendship and coidentity that is being communicated here. The first girl is saying, if translated to something a male mind can understand, "I like you and trust you, and you are my friend, so I'm sharing my life with you.", while the second girl is saying, "I'm the same as you, and return the feeling.".

This is why many men who have been long married simply know that their wife looks good when she asks, and that the answer to "I'm worried about these bills." is sometimes "I love you, honey.". We may not speak it like a native, but it's like speaking Spanish in Southern California - knowing at least a few words helps you get by. That, and it can help you order that drink and sammich.

[Raiden no Kishi]

Actually, one big reason for the communication divide is that men and women speak on entirely different levels. The way men operate is we either think or feel, but not at the same time on a single subject. We separate the factual from the emotional. We define reality and relationship separately. To us, communication is a way of exchanging information. When our girl asks "are you thirsty?" while on a long drive, our thought pattern goes (question-thirst?)->(body-no)->(mouth-"Nope, not thirsty.").

Women, though, operate on both levels at the same time, merging what we men keep separate. To them, a thought, and therefore a communication, has both a logical and an emotional component. When they ask "Are you thirsty?", they may be deciding whether or not they are thirsty themselves, and, because of how women perceive relationship, a man's statement of "No, I'm not thirsty." may mean to the woman "I don't care if you are thirsty.", because it cuts off the decision process for them.

This is also why women may infer anger or lack of feeling in a man, based off of the lack of emotional content in his communication. If a woman cares for a man, she'll want reassurance that he cares for her - thus the classic "how do I look?". It's phrased as a factual question, because the female mind tends to determine facts based on relationship. So affection is expected to translate to a positive response and disaffection a negative response. The male mind, of course, naturally thinks of the factual response, because guys hear it as a factual question.

Don't believe me that the feminine mind bases facts on relationship? Look at young girls who are close friends. Listen to then talk about something. Often, one will say, for example, something like "My mother has a pink dress.", to which the other will say "My mother has a pink dress too.", even though it isn't true. This is because the pink dress is irrelevant to the actual communication - it is friendship and coidentity that is being communicated here. The first girl is saying, if translated to something a male mind can understand, "I like you and trust you, and you are my friend, so I'm sharing my life with you.", while the second girl is saying, "I'm the same as you, and return the feeling.".

This is why many men who have been long married simply know that their wife looks good when she asks, and that the answer to "I'm worried about these bills." is sometimes "I love you, honey.". We may not speak it like a native, but it's like speaking Spanish in Southern California - knowing at least a few words helps you get by. That, and it can help you order that drink and sammich.

Somehow, I think you've seen the same seminar my professor showed to us in Interpersonal Communication last week. ^_^

.rai//

[Kaligraphic]

I probably have if it's the same one I stole the examples from, but if it works, it works. I think I probably ripped off another communication theorist and some comedian whose name I forget, as well.

Still, I don't claim it to be original. Just that it works.

[chibiphonebooth]

It's true that 'often' girls talk about nothing and us guys have a hard time listening in that sense, but if they say something of value we listen.
Don't we?

ahahahhahhahahaah

[Psycho Molos]

It's true that 'often' girls talk about nothing and us guys have a hard time listening in that sense, but if they say something of value we listen.
Don't we?

And sometimes they talk and talk and talk and talk and talk forever and hide the valuable thing inside like one ginormous sandwitch or they talk forever and keep on harping the same thing over and over.

[minakichan]

Geh, I dunno, I think we can draw these lines between the ways girls and guys communicate/think, but are they really that distinct/divisive? Most people can definitely talk to the opposite sex fine, without all the drama, right? Or are all the people I know just abnormally well-adjusted genderless amoebas?

[Doe Johnson]

EDIT: I can't find the exact sketch I'm looking for, but this one (from the same show) deals with honesty too... Of a different sort.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Eng-pRT9uA&feature=related

Is the one you're thinking of the "What Do You Think?" one? Where she's trying to pick out something for the disco? Her dress is a little "loud."

[uc pseudonym]

Geh, I dunno, I think we can draw these lines between the ways girls and guys communicate/think, but are they really that distinct/divisive? Most people can definitely talk to the opposite sex fine, without all the drama, right? Or are all the people I know just abnormally well-adjusted genderless amoebas?

I'm not sure if it means anything for me to speak up here, but I think that can be answered with a definitive "no." Definitions of gender vary immensely by culture and even subculture. From my experience an individual's personality is a much greater impact on their methods of communication than gender.

[spoiler]Adept communicators, of course, will release that all I mean by this post is "Do you love me?[/spoiler]

[Etoh*the*Greato]

Gender can be imposed on someone by their culture. School teaches a lot of girls to be very... non-direct in what they say. Not all girls, but many of them. Sitting by my Fiancee as she struggled through Highschool and beyond was SO frustrating. It would have been so much simpler to say "These people are not your friends. They don't like you. You cannot benifit from being around them, and they keep saying awful stuff about you. Deck them and be done with it." By senior year she figured it out, of course, and did incidentally end up punching one of them. Heh.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Depends on who you believe. Many people will say that differences between men and women are in no way genetic (especially those ultra-feminists) and that "gender" is purely a social construct. Others will say that there are stark genetic differences between men and woman which shapes the overall personality of a men or a women.

You could say that there are obvious genetic differences such as "men being more spacially intellectual" while women are better with landmarks, and these processes are used with different parts of the brain. We can all pretty much agree that this is a genetic difference between men and women, but others may argue that the current genetic differences it is simply a result of evolutionary psychology due to consistent gender-socialization over the past thousands of years.

Usually, most people agree that gender differences are a mix of biological and social factors. Now what is more dominant? That's often debated. I personally say that the majority of gender differences are a result of socialization, whereas the more cognitive-processing differences would be genetic (like different areas of intellect, thought-processes, attachment towards the young, etc).

[Nate]

I think I have posted this before in another thread but since Ryan and uc brought it up I will post it again.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

I think I have a new respect for Dinosaur Comics. XD

[Bobtheduck]

Is the one you're thinking of the "What Do You Think?" one? Where she's trying to pick out something for the disco? Her dress is a little "loud."

Well, technically, that's a recurring sketch. I wouldn't post that one because of her "loud" dress, but other ones in that series are cleaner... Like her "high" hat, and her christmas outfit.


"You can never just say I look nice, can you?"

Speaking of men and women,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ff13zZ0h0k

[Etoh*the*Greato]

I think I a renewd respect for Dinosaur Comics in addition to my already quite considerable respect for them since they are so great.. XD

fixt.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

Bobtheduck, you've encouraged me to buy Man Stroke Woman.
I love British comedy.

[Bobtheduck]

Bobtheduck, you've encouraged me to buy Man Stroke Woman.
I love British comedy.

Just so you know... there are a couple R rated sketches... I'd skip past the "operating room" sketch, for sure, even if you don't skip any others.

[Warrior 4 Jesus]

I know mate, thanks. It's rated M15+ here in Australia for Moderate themes, Moderate sexual references, Moderate coarse language. I'll be discerning, don't want to cause myself to stumble.

[Kaligraphic]

Clearly, in defining the communication methods of several billion individuals in a single go, defined only by sex, any description that we can come up with will be flat out wrong for some of them. For any group of people that large, the best we can do is to give tendencies, and some people will exhibit those tendencies to greater or lesser degrees.

Except, of course, for minakichan's friends, who are clearly all just abnormally well-adjusted genderless amoebas.

[uc pseudonym]

Clearly, in defining the communication methods of several billion individuals in a single go, defined only by sex, any description that we can come up with will be flat out wrong for some of them. For any group of people that large, the best we can do is to give tendencies, and some people will exhibit those tendencies to greater or lesser degrees.

Naturally. However, while you were articulating general trends (we could argue about whether those are representative elsewhere), minakichan's question asked if they were normative. This is a very different thing and I think we need to be careful not to create self-fulfilling prophecies by setting up gender expectations.

[Bobtheduck]

Naturally. However, while you were articulating general trends (we could argue about whether those are representative elsewhere), minakichan's question asked if they were normative. This is a very different thing and I think we need to be careful not to create self-fulfilling prophecies by setting up gender expectations.

I do believe, howeverer, there are trends that are purely biological, though they may indicate only tendencies and certainly not fate, and it may be a counter culture movement to fight the biology and tendencies, or perhaps a showing of some degree of control over our instincts. A lot can be said for the desire to rebel as well as the desire to be more than our instincts. A thinking people, and this includes what may traditionally be labeled gender roles, among many other areas of life.