Well, by your statement "completely sex based"... I agree. There are very, very few places that this would be the case. I'm just talking about radically different in terms of, say, the ways in which they prioritize the outcome of a conversation: Men in general tend to use conversation and discussion in the corporate environment to primarily share "tactical" information, and tend to do this in a more direct and "assertive" manner than women. Women tend to prioritize interpersonal cooperation more, so tactical information will be shared in a more suggestive and indirect manner than their male counterparts, and women will also discuss less "tactical" information more freely than men (again, in general). I believe this type of "tendency" of men to place an inherent higher value on "hard data", and discuss it in a manner that clearly indicates a "lower context" form of communication. Women on the other hand will choose words that are more "cooperative" and "agreeable" in the very nature of their communication.
Women will more frequently use phrases such as "I may not have explained this as carefully as I should have" when in a situation that requires them to re-direct the actions of fellow employees who are doing a task incorrectly. Men will do this too! HOWEVER... they do it MUCH MORE FREQUENTLY if talking to a SUPERIOR... if talking to a subordinate, men will more often speak very directly, like "I have explained this already, is there something you needed to know in order to get it going properly?"
But WOMEN... in this case, will use the same type of "cooperative phrasing" regardless of talking to a superior or a subordinate. This is cross cultural, and in fact research shows that word choice in fact helps provide insight into some very different, somewhat primal "core values" that men and women in fact differ from one another fairly significantly.
Also, women tend to determine the relative value of an interaction more as a function of what was revealed or shared, whereas men actively seek a "resolution", or "answer". Some studies have shown that this is in fact very much so a "hard wired" difference between men and women. I might look up some references for this post at a later date.
Yes, I do agree these points are valid, but I contend that they fail in explaining why in ANY area of study that I can think of, the top 5 individuals are so disproportionately male. (i'm also not even considering areas where it is exclusively a male or female arena, or athletics of any sort) I'll admit i'm not thinking very hard about it... but, feel free to suggest an academic, artistic, vocational, or avocational arena in which the top 5 individuals are predominately women. Anywhere, of any sort, now, or in the past. I find it quite shocking myself that I can't think of even one field where this is the case...but, again, i'm not thinking very hard, and would love to be proven wrong here.
I've seen some "pop science" articles on just this... but, i've never looked at the data with a very discriminating eye. I've seen anecdotal evidence to such a large degree that I may have overlooked this. I'll consider it some time, but feel free to link an article or something you recommend.
Well, it may not be AS anecdotal as you may think... but i'll be the first to admit i am choosing from "well suited" examples from studies i've come across over the past 15ish years. Some were extremely well conducted, and in fact broke ground in gender "studies". And others i'm sure were more "suspect". But a lot is from memory, and there is some anecdotal stuff as well.
Agree overall again. Nothing I said in fact is in opposition to any of this. I really just was seeking to make a point that there is a proclivity for men to be more overtly competitive, risk taking, and single minded than women (on the whole). Yes, some women have these traits as well, and they are the ones that occupy one or two of the "top 5" positions in any field/vocation/whatever. It's just most women don't share this to the extent that men do, on the level anyway. And I don't believe this is a "cultural phenomena". Men simply don't have "biological clocks" they way many women do. Men have more of a psychological need to be "better" than others at something that offers distinct and clear boundaries on what "better" means. Women tend to be "better" at things that don't have such clearly defined boundaries. What makes a "better" caregiver? How would you score who is the "best at nurturing creativity in the workplace?" or how about who's the winner at "getting what they want while maintaining high levels of diplomacy and cooperation at all times."
You see, these are actually really powerful and really valueable skills that women tend to have a natural proclivity for, and men tend to struggle more.
it's just they don't lend themselves to being "ranked" or "scored" as clearly or easily. Why? because women intrinsically place less value on such "scoring" But men don't.... and this makes a big difference as to what arenas men and women prefer to wok at, and are best suited to excel at, and maybe even more importantly... how "visable" those areas are to the rest of the world.
-E
Last edited:
