Analysis Of No Detail Is Too Small For Girls Answering A Simple Question '

In the social realm of life men and women have to meet different standards brought on by different sanctions to certain actions. This shapes the way that the general populous’ mannerisms carry over to the perception of the public eye. Women are still seen as subordinate to the male population by many factors and in some circumstances act lesser due to the pressure put on by the influential factors of society brought on by an older way of thought, made apparent usually by the figures who shape the behaviour of the individual.

The results of the Smith questionnaire engaged Friedan 's reportorial instincts. She sensed she was onto a story bigger than anything she had ever written. But when she circulated an article describing the plight so many women were experiencing, the male editors at the women 's magazines turned it down flat. It couldn 't be true, they insisted; women could not possibly feel as guilty or discontented as Friedan claimed. The problem must be hers. "Betty has gone off her rocker," an editor at ‘Redbook’ told her agent. "She has always done a good job for us, but this time only the most neurotic housewife could

This article by Deborah Tannen, written in 1990, addresses the differences between the communication styles of men and women and some of the ensuing problems that arise from these divergent behaviors. The article asserts "that although men tend to talk more than women in public situations, they often talk less at home. And this pattern is wreaking havoc with marriage" (p. 474). Research indicates that a majority of women state a lack of communication as the reason for seeking divorce as compared to only a few of the men. With the divorce rate at 50 percent the author says there is a "virtual epidemic of failed conversation" (p. 474) in America.

The extent and degree of information and detail written in this article about each represented author and their contributing works can ultimately be seen as one of the articles main strengths. However, although this article gives a vast amount of information on the women’s opinions and beliefs the article at times seems disassembled and erratic. The flow of the article is somewhat hard to follow, and without an increased measure of concentration, the ability of the reader to comprehend and decipher whom the author is speaking of can be lost. Also, with the extensive amounts of information and detail that each female author contributes to the argument, readers are bombarded with data to interpret and distinguish upon. With the author of the article not decisively choosing the strongest points of argument from each author, the information becomes overwhelming and possibly confusing at times.

In Dave Barry’s article “We’ve Got the Dirt on Guy Brains” and the Deborah Tannen’s “Sex, Lies, and Conversation” , the authors discussed the difference between men and women in terms of specific issues. However, their opinions of what reasons have led to certain differences diverged. This essay aimed at providing a detailed examination of both articles by comparing some of the points. First of all, I will discuss the shared point of both articles regarding the differences of men and women. Then the I will move on taking about the major different opinions the two authors held. Once these have been done, a brief examination of the the evidence in both articles.

In the essay Sex, Lies, and Conversation Deborah Tannen focuses on the differences and lack of communication between men and women though observations. She came to the conclusion that men were not lacking in their listening, but they were however listening in a different way than the women did. On the other hand, men aren’t the only people that have terrible communication skills. In many ways, these differences between the two genders can cause major conflict when not understood by the opposite side. A few examples of lack of communication may be when women don’t decide where they would like to eat, men who walk away from an argument rather than talking it out, and their decision making processes.

She validates her own story by pointing to similar experiences in others. Her point that she is considered delusional and “in a nutshell female” when she contradicts a man is authenticated when she retells a story her then boyfriend’s uncle had told her. He says one of his neighbor’s wife had run out into the street in the middle of the night exclaiming that her husband was trying to kill her. When Solnit ask why the uncle thinks this is impossible he explains that they were a respectable middle-class family. To him, it was far more likely that the women was crazy then that her husband was trying to kill her. This argument is farther disproven by Solnit when she explains that three women a day are murdered by spouses or ex-spouses in America. So, it is far more likely that her husband was trying to kill her than that she was crazy. The use of this story and other artistic proof, like the FBI agent Coleen Rowley’s story and Marine Lance Corporal Maria Lauterbach’s death, throughout the essay proves that this is not only a personal problem, but a larger issue effecting women every day. She shows us that a women’s word, therefore her very existence, is often taken to be less credible than a man’s. That “they are not reliable witnesses to their own lives.” Solnit also proves the cogency of her essay

The author implements various means to support his point further, from other books (William Pollack’s Real Boys), social psychologists like Robert Brannon, and hundreds of interviews with men who feel pressured to reach these unattainable standards placed upon them (Kimmel 540-541). Kimmel creates a formal and collegiate writing style, yet has a familiar and conversational tone which makes the article easier to digest and

Kinzel and Solnit both aimed their articles at the male population to point out an issue that is usually swept under the rug. A man being the intended audience strongly affects the argument because they are the ones that the authors have a problem with. They want to get their point across but need to do it in a way that does not anger the reader. Kinzel shows her great understanding of the issue by talking about how women are capable of this type of attitude. She even describes her behavior in situations like this “I’ve always called it “lecture mode,” and I even have this habit where I take a deep, semi-dramatic breath before it shifts on, and I begin, on the exhale, with, “Well--” I always begin with “Well--” and I always conclude with, “Does that make sense?” (Kinzel). By acknowledging this male readers are more receptive to her message and more likely to be open minded.

Women with strong masculine traits often receive similar criticism; women are expected to behave differently than men. One study found that in professional business environments women were more likely to disclose chronic illness and find social support, while men were expected to maintain composure and not stray from the task at hand (Munir, Price, Haslam, Leka, & Griffiths, 2006). To further highlight this difference between genders on the disclosure of personal information, women who score high in feminine traits are more likely to become emotionally invested and disclose personal information about themselves in conversations with acquaintances (Shaffer, Pegalis, & Cornell, 2001).

Annette Bair and Marilyn Friedman have opposing views on whether women have distinct moral perspectives. Like Friedman, I believe that women have no different moral perspectives than men. Some people, like Bair, think that women base their moral perspectives on merely trust and love and men base theirs on justice. Friedman points out that care and justice coincide . People use justice to decide what is appropriate in caring relationships and care is brought into account when determining what is just. Since these two moral perspectives correspond, gender does not distinguish different moral perspectives.

There exists a disparity in the communication phenomenon between men and women. This disparity according to scholars can be attributed to the male dominance in the society today and relationship tensions between couples. A study on cross-sex conversations showed that, when men and women engage in a friendly conversation, they do so as equals but they do not play the same roles in the communication. Women tend to ask more questions and likely to utter utterances that encourage responses from the other speaker. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to interrupt their partner’s conversations and make direct opinions and facts to control or dominate the conversation. Thus, the communication phenomenon between men and women is strikingly distinct.

“Boys will be boys, and girls will be girls”, says Aaron Devor. Women and men have always been seen as totally different people, but is it right to say that women are different from men. Many research findings support these gender differences. The range of critical response to the topic of the gender is clearly discussed in the reviews written by Aaron Devor “Gender Role Behaviors and Attitudes,” Deborah Blum “The Gender Blur,” and Mariah Burton Nelson in “I Won. I’m Sorry”. Marian Burton Nelson, a former Stanford University and professional basketball player and author of sit book on gender identity. Deborah Blum, a Pulitzer Prize-winning professor of journalism at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Aaron Derov, a sociology professor at University of Victoria. All three articles have similar and different opinions, but they are all about gender differences. While Devor and Blum talk about the origin of gender differences in men and women, Nelson focuses more on strong women; all three articles focus their discussions on aggressiveness, gender behaviors, and male domination.

American society views the acceptable man as being controlling and domineering, whereas the acceptable and desirable woman’s purpose is to cater to the man, physically and sexually. Females are nearly always stripped down (often literally) to what lies at their core, their essential, biological womanliness, their essential subordinate position to man.” (Byerly, Carolyn, Ross 26) When women are portrayed in such a way, individuals begin to be dissatisfied with themselves, as well as with the ones they are intimate with, comparing them to the impossible standards of society. While attempting to appease the opposite sex, then they aren’t being true to their

Have you ever been the “victim” of mansplaining? If you think hard enough, you’ll probably recall at least one instance in your life when someone explained something to you that you knew more about than them. Whether it had to do with your health, age, academics, sports, work, or social issues that specifically applied to you, someone attempted to explain a topic that you likely already understood better than them. And if you’re a female, you can probably dredge up a few bemusing memories of men doing this to you. The relatively new term for this action is “mansplaining,” which means, per Lily Rothman’s “A Cultural History of Mansplaining,” “explaining without regard to the fact the explainee knows more than the explainer” (Rothman 54). Although the article lends to the voice of the ebbing feminist movement, Rothman’s writing has a number of shortcomings. She fails to adequately explain the history of mansplaining and presents a limited outlook on what mansplaining might really mean and its societal impact.