Communication skills for women: Profiting off of the marginalization of women in the workplace

We live in a world where men’s practices and ways of being are largely viewed as ‘the norm’. Women, to the extent, that they are even recognized as having practices and ways of being are seen as needing to fix these things in order to ‘be successful’ in society. Our discourse about communication in the workplace in particular presents men’s practices in a positive light (for example, ‘assertive’ and ‘tough’) and women’s practices mainly in a negative light (for example, ‘overly-emotional’ and ‘weak’). I recently received an excellent exemplar of this type of discourse in my inbox, announcing an intervention to teach women ‘communication skills’ for the workplace.

for_women_flyer

These great entrepreneurs (Fred Pryor seminars) are suggesting that they have solutions for fixing women’s inability to have themselves “taken seriously” and their problems “dealing with other people’s [presumably men’s] anger”. The shrewd business people are also seeking to help women get “the floor” in conversations.

While many women no doubt have experienced these things, the advertisement presents them as things women allegedly lack (for example, the ability to take the floor and the ability to control their emotions). However, rather than necessarily being things women cannot do, we might consider that in fact women have perfectly functional alternative practices. Indeed, this is exactly what sociolinguists like Deborah Tannen argue. While men’s often competitive speech may be functional for workplaces dominated by men, women’s speech often belies a greater focus on achieving cooperation.

Yet we fail to acknowledge the communication skills women actually have and instead point to their apparent ‘failings’. This discourse seems to be exactly what Nancy Henley and Cheris Kramarae were talking about when they wrote that

Hierarchies determine whose version of the communication situation will prevail; whose speech style will be seen as normal; who will be required to learn the communication style, and interpret the meaning, of the other; whose language style will be seen as deviant, irrational, and inferior; and who will be required to imitate the other’s style in order to fit into the society (Henley and Kramarae, 1991, p. 20)

I think this point is best driven home by a creative alternative reality in which men are expected to learn ‘communication skills’ to ‘be successful’ in a world dominated by the type of communication women might prefer. In such a reality the flyer below is what I would have received in my inbox.

for_men_flyer

Instead of women learning to “control their emotions”, in this alternative world men are viewed as deviant when they fail to validate others’ emotional experiences. Instead of women needing to learn to deal with men’s anger, men are held back in the workplace by their ‘aggressive’ verbal behavior. Instead of women needing to learn to take the floor, men are viewed as selfishly monopolizing the floor and failing to make space for others to speak.

My point here is not that we should start such an alternative industry or that we should create a world in which men are marginalized. The point is that no such programs exist due to men’s verbal behavior being viewed as normal and acceptable and women’s being viewed as inappropriate for the workplace. This, no doubt, would be defended by many as representing the competitive nature of United States capitalism. However, we might also consider whether women’s communicative styles have a very productive place in our workplaces and our society as a whole. A recent example comes from the bipartisan Congressional deal that ended the shutdown of the federal government. The success of this deal was widely credited to the female members of the US Senate and House of Representatives who were able to craft a deal while the men of Congress were stuck in gridlock. This success may have had a lot to do with women’s cooperative communication style. As Senator Susan Collins suggested about women, “we are used to working together in a collaborative way”.

References

Henley, N. & Kramarae, C. (1991). Gender, Power and Miscommunication in Nikolas Coupland, Howard Giles and John Wiemann (eds.). “Miscommunication” and Problematic Talk (p. 18-43), Newbury Park, Calif.: SAGE.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Language and gender
3 comments on “Communication skills for women: Profiting off of the marginalization of women in the workplace
  1. Mai Kuha says:

    Janet Holmes suggests that “[b]y appropriating [normatively masculine] strategies, women contribute to de-gendering them and make it clear that they are tools of leadership discourse, and not exclusively of male discourse. (Similarly, men … who adopt more feminine strategies in the workplace, have the same potential effect.)” Thoughts?

  2. nsubtirelu says:

    Yeah thanks for the interesting quote. I guess I don’t want to be seen as promoting the idea that women SHOULDN’T use styles historically associated with men for any reason. I think Holmes could be in some way correct, although I would also challenge that quote in terms of simplicity as it seems to suggest that men and women can adopt the opposite gender’s practices without social sanctions, which I don’t think is the case at all (see Hilary Clinton). Ideology dies hard though, so I think it takes more than just a few people changing their behavior. What are your thoughts on the issue?

  3. Mai Kuha says:

    That is a really good point. I guess ultimately it’s a somewhat empirical question that could be settled by finding out what attitudes people have towards men and women with “normatively masculine” and “normatively feminine” styles.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 412 other followers

Follow linguistic pulse on Twitter
%d bloggers like this: