Communication

[WolfGate]

I would say that IN GENERAL, men are better at cold hard fact based communication and women are better at touchy feely emotion based communication. The thing is, neither of those two things is inherently better than the other.

My difficulty is that the overriding theme in improving communication is that men are told they need to be better at communicating feelings and emotions and thats the beginning and end of all maritial communication problems. It IS true that by and large most men do need to learn to put facts aside and communicate about emotions better. But at the same time, women need to learn to put the feelings aside and communicate factually better. There is a time and place and need for both types of communication in a marriage.

Not out of line if looking at Myers Briggs distributions. A significant difference between genders occurs in the Thinking/Feeling preference where roughly 2/3 of the thinker category are men and also roughly 2/3 of the feeling category are women.

None of the other preferences show any significant gender difference (Introvert/Extrovert, Sensing/Intuition, Judging/Perceiving).

 

[McScribe]

You know genetic studies about gender may show very small differences but very small differences can mean a lot. The truth is that genetically speaking men and women have historically been different for reasons which are becoming challenged by changes in how we live. In a way insisting that these differences do not exist is unhelpful. It obscures the possibility of dealing realistically with how our basic biological makeup is challenged by how we have come to live.

 

[dinonum]

d

 

[dinonum]

e

 

[McScribe]

Whether you like it or not, relationships have become in a way more confusing and more challenging because expectations have been changed enormously. Maybe it isn't but it seems very hard sometimes because of this. So people want some definition, they want some clarity, some place to start from in figuring things out. Unfortunately I've noticed the tendency from some quarters, particularly feminist quarters it seems, is "figure it out on your own and stop whining." On the other hand some others might simply say "What have feminists got to complain about?"

Personally I believe that while the Bible generally calls upon us to have love and kindness towards one another, that there are perspectives we might generally come from which affect how we see things and how we communicate. And part of having compassion for one another can be demonstrated in understanding that. Christianity should transcend the sides in such things and help us overcome communication difficulties.

In a way men and women cannot help but have some communication differences whether we went into science or not. The experiences of a woman generally are going to be different from those of a man generally. These things cannot help but cloud our understanding.

 

[dinonum]

f

 

[Conservativation]

Cons, I am curious, where do you get your facts concerning this subject? Also, this isn't meant sarcastic given the subject, but your posts are not very direct often times, and I am honestly not sure what you think the one simple truth you are trying to convey is.

Overall what each person experiences with their marriage IS irrelevant to their gender.

You said "Men communicate just fine. Its more than just being understood, its also incumbent to send a coherent and UNAMBIGUOUS message. Thats what men want and need." The problem is you did nothing here but switch the roles, unless I make assumptions about your beliefs on communicates, this is absolutey no better than saying men are terrible communicators. It also implies based on the other parts of your post that women are generally by nature incoherent and ambiguous when communicating.

Do you believe that assertion to be true?

w

 

[Created2Write]

Din, I don't think Cons' point was that generalizations fix relationship problems. I think he was just trying to have a discussion and see what others think about men and women and communication. Nothing more.

And, no offense, but just because you don't see the relevancy in the discussion doesn't mean people can't talk about subjects like these. They have a right to discuss it if they want, and you don't have to read it or respond if it comes down to that.

 

[chaz345]

And yet... I have seen nothing that has been said to actually help. Establishing that there may be certain differences between genders doesn't help to define anything. What I have attempted to establish is that gender generalizations are not the best starting point for fixes communication.

On a side note - well... nvm... I'll just start a new thread.

Gender generalizations, lacking the specific details of both sides of an individual situation are the ONLY starting point for a discussion on how to fix communication.

In fact they are the only starting point we have for offering advice on anything here. For example if a man comes in saying my wife won't have sex with me, we give a bunch of possibilities as to the problem. If a woman comes in saying the same thing we give a very different bunch of possibilites because we're talking about a man instead of a woman. The difference in advice is based on things that are generally true along gender lines.

What I can't understand is why anyone feels that that is threatening or limiting or putting any one individual in a box.

 

[chaz345]

The OP of this thread is a good example though of a generalization turned into a negative judgement. It is plain and simply undeniably true that in general, men are not as good as women at communicating emotionally. I've got no problem with that at all. Where the problem comes in is in saying that that fact is responsible for most maritial communication problems.

 

[Created2Write]

Gender generalizations, lacking the specific details of both sides of an individual situation are the ONLY starting point for a discussion on how to fix communication.

In fact they are the only starting point we have for offering advice on anything here. For example if a man comes in saying my wife won't have sex with me, we give a bunch of possibilities as to the problem. If a woman comes in saying the same thing we give a very different bunch of possibilites because we're talking about a man instead of a woman. The difference in advice is based on things that are generally true along gender lines.

What I can't understand is why anyone feels that that is threatening or limiting or putting any one individual in a box.

The conclusion I have reached is that gender generalizations can only harm or threaten a person if they allow it to. If someone knows their self and who they are and are comfortable in who they are, then I don't see how a generalization that may or may not apply to them can be threatening at all.

 

[Conservativation]

The conclusion I have reached is that gender generalizations can only harm or threaten a person if they allow it to. If someone knows their self and who they are and are comfortable in who they are, then I don't see how a generalization that may or may not apply to them can be threatening at all.

I dont even understand it then, I dont get why someone needs to be "comfortable in who there are" in order that a generalization doesnt hurt them.

There is no value judgment to a generalization. Its a statement of something that IS......stop. Not something that is good if you are "in" and bad if you are "out".....just something that IS.

 

[dinonum]

I recently talked to a friend of mine who is a marriage counselor. He told me that if communication is a major issue in a marriage it is almost always the men's fault since women are hardwired to be communicators and men are doers. He told me that even in his own marriage, he has to consiciously decide to be a communicator even after over 20 years of marriage. What do you people think?

Suggesting this may work for some marriages where the communication issues are the fault of the man, but I certainly don't believe this is true for many other marriages. It is unhelpful to the husband who is already trying to communicate well and who has a wife at home who isn't working to communicate better at all.

 

[Conservativation]

Something interesting....those who here consistently reject generalizations, and do so here in this thread on communication ofetn use anecdotes OR even the posters on this forum AS the anecdote to use to ostensibly refute the generalization.

Well then, if an anecdote, AND more importantly an anecdote involving posters here is sufficient to refute a generalization, it should be then more than sufficient to SUPPORT one as well.

So, here goes.....women reject generalizations more than men.

It will be interesting to see how that would be refuted, because it uses the exact same "data" that is used to object to generalizations.

 

[JaneFW]

The OP of this thread is a good example though of a generalization turned into a negative judgement. It is plain and simply undeniably true that in general, men are not as good as women at communicating emotionally. I've got no problem with that at all. Where the problem comes in is in saying that that fact is responsible for most maritial communication problems.

I do want you to note that the OP was not saying this was so, but was quoting someone else:

[a male marriage counselor] told me that if communication is a major issue in a marriage it is almost always the men's fault

 

[Created2Write]

Something interesting....those who here consistently reject generalizations, and do so here in this thread on communication ofetn use anecdotes OR even the posters on this forum AS the anecdote to use to ostensibly refute the generalization.

Well then, if an anecdote, AND more importantly an anecdote involving posters here is sufficient to refute a generalization, it should be then more than sufficient to SUPPORT one as well.

So, here goes.....women reject generalizations more than men.

It will be interesting to see how that would be refuted, because it uses the exact same "data" that is used to object to generalizations.

No they don't. I don't reject generalizations.

 

[JaneFW]

Gender generalizations, lacking the specific details of both sides of an individual situation are the ONLY starting point for a discussion on how to fix communication.

In fact they are the only starting point we have for offering advice on anything here. For example if a man comes in saying my wife won't have sex with me, we give a bunch of possibilities as to the problem. If a woman comes in saying the same thing we give a very different bunch of possibilites because we're talking about a man instead of a woman. The difference in advice is based on things that are generally true along gender lines.

What I can't understand is why anyone feels that that is threatening or limiting or putting any one individual in a box.

But you have to agree that the men and women are given different advice. There are men here suggesting that neglected men should hire a prostitute/have an affair and/or divorce (but only when the kids are old enough so he doesn't have to pay child support for them). The wife is just "typical" - most wives are like that - and she is breaking her vows, and disobedient to the Bible.

A woman hears that her husband may be gay, may be having an affair, may be using porn, and anyway - is she overweight, and - lol, my favorite - is she "clean". I have never seen anyone suggest to a man that his wife may be gay, or having an affair or using porn - and yet she could quite clearly by gay, except it's never even mentioned, and I have never seen a man be asked if he is overweight or "clean". So evidently there are quite distinct gender lines when it comes to that question that are based upon assumptions that it's the wife's fault when her husband is neglectful, and the wife's fault, um, when she is neglectful.

I do think it is very limiting to put an individual in a box. Nowhere does the Bible say we are identical. While there are quite distinct differences between genders - there are many areas where we cross the line, and where a man has attributes that are considered to be female, and a woman has attributes that are considered to be male. I have never forgotten a former (female) coworker being shocked that my husband had gone to the store to pick out tablecloths for our kitchen table. I had thought nothing of it. My husband does have good taste (hey, maybe he is gay!) and was a SAHD at the time, and had more time for it than I did. Obviously his interest in "fabrics" was not something she considered to be manly. In fact, he has chosen every tablecloth since, with matching place mats too! What a guy. It's something that he's much, much better at than me.

 

[Conservativation]

No they don't. I don't reject generalizations.

See

a small percentage of women are both clever AND funny

 

[WolfGate]

No they don't. I don't reject generalizations.

LOL!!!!

 

[FaithPrevails]

No they don't. I don't reject generalizations.

Rebel.

FWIW, I don't reject them, either. I just don't personally think that we can/should only ever talk from the 10,000 ft level. Saying, "well, my experience has been..." is not rejecting the generalization. It can sometimes be the only way a person can contribute to a conversation if they haven't experienced or fit into a particular generalization.

JMHO