Writes the psychologist Adam Grant in "Women Know Exactly What They’re Doing When They Use 'Weak Language'" (NYT).
July 31, 2023
"Gender stereotypes don’t hurt only women — they often hold men back too."
"Economists find that headstrong girls grow up to earn less money at work … and so do needy and dependent boys. This is true even after accounting for occupation, education and self-esteem. And just as women are liked less if they’re seen as arrogant and disagreeable, men are liked less and paid less if they come across as too modest and too agreeable.
The solution to this problem isn’t to urge meek men to become arrogant. It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility. If we do that, we won’t have to keep encouraging women to communicate more forcefully. Instead, we’ll finally be able to recognize the difference between assertiveness and aggressiveness."
Writes the psychologist Adam Grant in "Women Know Exactly What They’re Doing When They Use 'Weak Language'" (NYT).
Writes the psychologist Adam Grant in "Women Know Exactly What They’re Doing When They Use 'Weak Language'" (NYT).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
44 comments:
Huh?
"It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility." It's to pretend that human nature doesn't exist. Good idea, though.
If one challenges a billion years of animal evolution with a flash-in-the-pan / utopian feminist framework, one must be correct about every little thing for it to last. If one's visions is imperfect, humans will revert to millions of years of evolved and standardized ape behaviors. They are proven to be sustainable.
The solution to this problem isn’t to urge meek men to become arrogant. It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility. If we do that, we won’t have to keep encouraging women to communicate more forcefully.
3,2,1, gahrie: no woman must ever be allowed to feel bad about anything, ever, or however he puts it. (I'm amazed that I can't recreate the quote! Must be because I haven't had my second cup of coffee yet.)
Maybe the solution is to "teach" workplace listeners to interpret both styles as effective expression. (And by "teach," I mean "expect.") Or, maybe the solution is still to expect women to use more direct language in the workplace than they might be inclined to use in their private lives, since more direct language is less prone to misinterpretation than the "weak," suggestion- or consensus-oriented language that I must assume they're talking about here.
There are plenty of men who could use practice in effective direct communication. My husband is quite direct, for example, but even with me he often says things that might just be his opinion or might be a call to action. (That is, he might just be venting about how Waze sent him a stupid way again, or he might want me to check for other routes or check Google Maps. And if I guess wrong, it increases his frustration.)
This is one of the places where intentionalism gets tripped up these days. Ordinarily, I am happy to give speakers or writers the benefit of the doubt when they claim to have intended one thing but I interpreted another (and a reasonable person could see my interpretation - I'm not talking about when I'm being a jerk and deliberately misinterpreting). But in order to clarify the actual intent when action is necessary, we the listeners or readers have to be able to ask clarifying questions without the speakers' or writers' taking offense and shutting down. And unfortunately, we live in the age of offense.
Also: why do we need "a strong way to express concern and humility"? Isn't that kind of a non sequitur?
Oh for the love of...
I am a psychiatrist with significant clinical work in psychology, especially with children. Please take Mr. Grant's "opinion" with a grain of salt.
Can't we just transition aggressive women into men and meek men into women?
IF, we can JUST convince ALL men, to be fairies..
And convince ALL women, that they're MEN (and have them take drugs that'll sterilize them)..
In Just A Few Short Years, we will have SOLVED global warming!
Note: We REALLY NEED to convince ALL men, and ALL women..
If we leave out anyone, our eradication efforts will be for nought!
The solution is to normalize “weak” language as a strong way to express concern and humility? WTF?
Why don’t we just “be normal” and therefore we will use “strong” language as a strong way to express things and “weak” language as a weak way to express things. Then we can use weak language when we choose to say things weakly and strong language when we choose to say things with strength or forcefully.
For fucks sake…
I dunno. Again- I cannot access NYT and I'm not about to give them my money. But...from the post, I find this topic to be about 10 years late in how it views women today. I think they're way past that. And the idea of finding a group of women that they make less than a group of men no longer works. Women enter college in greater numbers today. They get bachelors and advanced degrees in greater numbers today. They are more sought out- specifically sought out- by employers today (white men need not apply). They are more sought out for positions of visibility, such as slots on boards, directorships, VPs, and Presidents. So...the days of decrying women's wages need some updating. Constantly- because it's changing on the fly. Especially as more and more men drop out of the workforce, and particularly out of the higher pay levels.
And in the end we'll find that to get a higher position, you often have to be more aggressive at some point in your ladder climbing. You're not going to get to leadership by being meek. So...women and men both will be assertive or not, depending on who they are. No one need act a certain way other than the way they are. If a woman uses weak language, it's who she is. At some point- it's not role playing. It's who a person is. I assure you, no matter how she comes off, Sheryl Sandburg did not use weak language on her way up.
Hey men,
Please change so women don't have to.
Thanks!
Don't change individuals, change the entire population. That shouldn't take more than a few HR training sessions, right?
Psychologist Adam Grant: Dear world, please change to fit my assumptions. It will make everything just well.
World: I'll get back to you on that prof. (Don't hold your breath.)
I like my women strong but humble - like black coffee watered with the milk of human kindness..
The most insidious gender stereotype is that there's no difference between males and females.
The second most insidious is that we're required to keep talking about this all these decades later, even with the supplanting of males as dominant in most fields that aren't engineering or blue-collar related.
Joan Didion's 1972 essay on the women's movement in the NYT nailed it then and has proven alarming prescient re the "progress" that'll never be seen as progress. Much like the modern civil-rights movement.
We should also prohibit Landlords from using common sense, like refusing to rent to people with “prior evictions.” You know, “normalize” a history of past evictions as indicative of a responsible, trustworthy, good credit risk, tenant. Like this:
https://reason.com/2023/07/28/aclu-backed-complaint-says-not-renting-to-people-with-past-evictions-is-illegal-race-sex-discrimination/
This country truly is upside down…
Extremes, regardless of gender, suggest an inability to fit in with teamwork, making it difficult to work in many environments. I’m missing the connection to gender stereotypes that is being suggested by the author, unless the point is the author’s own bias.
Rules for Young Men:
1. Don’t apologize
2. Don’t ask permission
3. Don’t be cloyingly nice
4. Don’t be a dick
5. Don’t read articles like the one linked here
Rules for Young Women
1. Don’t get fat
2. Don’t be a bitch
3. Don’t tell on people
4. Don’t get a nose ring
5. Don’t begin every conversation with, “I ….”
Hey, don’t blame me for writing these rules. Blame your DNA.
Why is the answer to feminize men's speech? Isn't that rather sexist?
Maybe what they call "gender stereotypes" are actually behaviors that have evolved over thousands of years and we might not want to discard them so carelessly to please a small percentage of people. How about people like the author stop expecting entire societies to bend to their will?
So smarter people make more money.
>The solution to this problem isn’t to urge meek men to become arrogant.<
Yeah, especially since "arrogance" is not the opposite of "meek."
>It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility.<
By all means, let's perpetuate and accelerate the pernicious feminization of men.
There is ZERO chance this study is capturing real data as to people's views of "agreeableness". This is shot through with subjectivity.
The solution to this problem isn’t to urge meek men to become arrogant. It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility.
Who says it's a problem?
I think the plethora of ads featuring dads in tutus and lipstick playing with their daughters indicates the normalizing of weak men is well underway.
How about we normalize the language around this clown's pronouncement?
And just map "normalized language" onto the time-honored phrase, "BS"?
The solution is to start your own business.
You then can be who you are. Headstrong or Meek.
The solution to this problem isn’t to urge meek men to become arrogant. It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility.
The correct way to think and behave is always for men to become more like women, so as to minimize the differences and remove barriers to inequality.
The one exception was when Sheryl Sandberg told women to "Lean In' and we know how well that went over.
More of the "women earn less than men for the same job" nonsense.
The phrase “If we do that” is famous for preceding famous last words.
The firm from which I retired now has a woman CEO. I knew her, slightly, back when she was a middle manager. It is a defense contractor and a Fortune 100 corporation. Since the 2980s Patriarchy only ever existed in the minds of women whose skill sets and personal drive did not match their ambition.
Weak-minded NYT addicts apparently can't get enough of this failure-assuaging bullshit. Does it contribute anything positive - to anybody?
Michael K said...
More of the "women earn less than men for the same job" nonsense.
7/31/23, 10:57 AM
That's why the courts are clearly overrun with this illegal activity... /s
The solution to this problem isn’t to urge meek men to become arrogant. It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility.
Maybe the solution is to accept that the bold will run the show just like they always have and get on with our lives.
Didn't they used to call this sociology?
The firm from which I retired now has a woman CEO. I knew her, slightly, back when she was a middle manager. It is a defense contractor and a Fortune 100 corporation. Since the 1980s Patriarchy only ever existed in the minds of women whose skill sets and personal drive did not match their ambition.
Shorter: Let the trans teach women how to be women.
Speaking of gender roles, Paul Rubens.
RIP, you weirdo.
Studies have shown that, when other factors influencing income (such as continuity of employment) are taken into account, the wage gap shrinks to insignificance.
In fact, in one such study, black women were found to earn more than men of any ethnicity in comparable jobs.
Many women have babies. Having a baby generally interrupts one's employment. Also, it is reasonable for moms to want to spend some time away from work with their newborns. If men all take the same amount of paternity leave as women took maternity leave, that cause of difference in earnings would vanish.
Didn't they used to call this sociology?
In speech you can't tell "used to" from "use to," as the difference between d and t is whether it's voiced (d) or not (t), and "use" is voiced already so it's a matter of when it cuts off. So nobody gets practice with the grammar.
The rule is that only one verb carries tense, in this case "did." So it has to be "didn't use to."
They didn't use to, or they used to.
Some man figured that out.
"Gender stereotypes don’t hurt only women"
The gender stereotype with the greatest negative impact on women is the drag queen. It's no different from blackface.
Whites pretending to be Black = men pretending to be women.
Women don’t know how to be assertive without being @$$holes because it is highly unlikely they will ever get punched in the face for being a jerk. Men learned as boys how to work within a social order by having conflict as boys. If you were too much of a jerk the other boys would kick your butt. Girls for the most part aren’t allowed to do that because girls as reproductive assets were to valuable to be allowed to hurt each other.
So now when women try to be “assertive” they often take it too far. They don’t innately understand the boundaries. There is also the hardwiring of men not liking to be given any lip by a woman. In a physical force based society that would often mean you were weak, it would bring down your social status among the men. So a big mouthed women is even worse than a big mouthed man to many men. The fact that those kind of women NEVER seem to know when they are taking it too far, never know when to shut up just adds to it.
CJinPA said...
"The solution to this problem isn’t to urge meek men to become arrogant. It’s to normalize 'weak language' as a strong way to express concern and humility.
Who says it's a problem?
I think the plethora of ads featuring dads in tutus and lipstick playing with their daughters indicates the normalizing of weak men is well underway."
Hey! Not so fast, pal! I've never worn a tutu, but I've played "Barbies" with my daughter and Pokemon and all sorts of other little girl stuff. I think involving parents in little kids play gives the kid the idea that he or she is included and has some control of his/her grown ups. At 30 my youngest still remembers those times we played together.
Jordan Peterson unavailable for comment from the reeducation gulag.
There’s a widely accepted term for people, male or female, who are arrogant and disagreeable. They’re known as assholes. No one racial,, ethnic, religious, or sexual group cornered the market on assholes. Few people want to be around assholes at any time, but especially not in the workplace. For that reason, being an asshole can harm your career as well as any relationships outside of work.
how THIS for your "gender sterotypes"
Blinken: Nuclear War Is No ‘Greater Threat to Humanity’ Than ‘Climate Change’
Blinken’s comments come as the Biden administration continues to increase the risk of nuclear war with Russia by arming Ukraine.
In an appearance on 60 Minutes Australia on Sunday, Blinken was asked whether the Biden admin views nuclear war or climate change as “the greater threat to humanity.”
SEE? it's OKAY, that we're STARTING a thermonuclear war, with both russia AND china..
Because WE HAVE DESTROY THE WORLD, IN ORDER TO SAVE IT!!!
i guess, that strong weak talk?
Post a Comment