Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    
    
    	Like the first paragraph said,
    	"Social psychologists now have hard evidence for what many
    	working women already know:...
    
    							nancy b.
    

    what took THEM so long to discover it?

    
    
    I must be one of the ignorant working woman, then.  Thank GOD this has
    not been my experience in the workplace!  
    
    Me?  Be tentative?  Hahaha..... 8-)   
    
    
    In all seriousness, my experiences have been exactly opposite.  
    
    Instead of dwelling on the "I told you so"s, perhaps we can discuss
    what we can do to change this.  I don't like thinking of myself, or
    anyone else, as being helpless to change something.
    
    I still live by the motto:  "When we take responsibility for something,
    THEN we find that we have the power to CHANGE it."
    
    kathy

    So, how does this situation get changed?  
    
    Mike

    
    
    RE: .4
    
    Education.
    
    Example.
    
    k

    I would prefer to analyse the research methodology before I believe the
    study.  It's too easy to get newspapers to copy crap and call it
    gospel.
    
    Now, if they had started with had started with Dr. Carli admitted that
    she wasn't sure of what she was saying but thought that ...
    
    :-) :-)
    
    ed

    
    RE .5
    
    Precisely HOW, Kathy?
    
    I agree with your view, but having thought around how to actually
    "educate" and show a good "example" I find that I feel very frustrated.
    
    I can't see how to educate people en mass - and anyway, you can't
    educate people who don't want to learn. Those in power may perceive
    that they have no need to learn - they've succeeded in "the system" as it 
    is, so "so can everyone else"....
    
    And example - it is the very assertive qualities in a woman that would
    make her a good example that will stop her being promoted to a position
    high enough to be inspirational...
    
    Trying to beat the system whilst fighting it seems a Catch-22...
    How would you suggest that we could get around this?
    There must be a way - I just can't see it...
    
    'gail
    

    The best way I can think of to start changing the situation is to show
    as many MEN the article as possible, and get them thinking about it.
    
    I'm not sure its such a good thing for women to get too deep into it;
    I'd hate to see us take a step backwards and act more hesitant because
    we know it works...

I originally wrote this as a reply to the processing topic (getting
the ever-sought .1400'th reply) then decided it would engender enough
disucssion on its own that it was worth a base note (or should be moved
somewhere else).

re: 22.1399:
>I constantly feel annoyed when I read your notes, and I think
>I've figured out why. It's not what you say, as much as how you
>say it that rubs me the wrong way.
...
>I would have felt a lot more inclined to listen to you and hear
>what you were saying if you had phrased things more along the
>lines of "I agree with you" and "I like what you said" ....

I'm gonna rathole the Processing topic (surely that's never happened
before, right?) for which I most profusely apologize and give permission
to move this note wherever appropriate (the Rathole, a new topic, or what)?

In yesterday's (Jan 7) Boston Globe, there was an article on male-female
styles of communication that stated -- as I remember -- that men are more
willing to listen to a woman's views if they are expressed "tentatively"
but are more willing to listen to a man's views if they are expressed
"definitivly" (these are not quotes, but merely my vague recollection).

To the extent that this is true (I'm not fully convinced), this may
explain some of the problems of communication we see here.  I know
that my own style of writing is quite different here than in other
parts of my life: in fact, I would go so far as to say it is more
"tentative" and less "definitive."  On the other hand, notes *by*
*women* that are nominated for the hall of fame are often those which
express views in a forceful manner.  Perhaps we could drag out the
statistical tools again (Chi-square should suffice)?

Martin.

618.9 has led an active life in its few minutes of existance -- it started
as a reply to the processing topic; then I moved it to a new basenote, then
I discovered this note and moved it as a reply there (and I expect a
large box of chocolates from the moderators for being such a considerate
90's kind of guy).

Like one of the other respondents, I'm somewhat sceptical of sociological
studies -- it's too easy to cook the data by asking the "right" questions.
On the other hand, as I note in 618.9, forceful replies from women
(the so-called "glass-chewing feminists") are highly regarded in this
forum, as are tentative, considerate, replies from men.  Furthermore,
foreceful replies from men here are often deprecated (vid� the opinion the
Womannotes community as a whole holds towards Soapbox).

For a number of years, I've wanted to start a "Confidential Chat" service
in Dec. Confidential Chat is an anonymous discussion forum that has gone on
in the Boston Globe for (I think) well over 50 years.  Participants are
*only* identified by Chat-names; never by their real names.  Such a
service would allow people to participate in notesfiles without being
identified in any way other than what they write.  The technical details
are fairly straightforward, but the bureaucratic problems are quite
serious, and I've never pursued the issue.

It would, however, permit a further exploration of communiction styles.

Martin.

    RE: .0 (basenote)
    
                           Well again, I must be an exception.  Women who
    can't approach me on even terms I quickly discount.  I know, its
    an aberration, but it is me.  I do enjoy women who are assertive in
    their belief system and willing to both listen and discuss...and yes,
    even argue.  I like strong people.  I tend to learn a great deal more
    from them.
    
    Dave

    Of course, just because the study was questionable doesn't mean the
    conclusions were wrong.
    
    One of the things that struck me about the study is that the topics
    that the subjects discussed were ones that don't admit of an
    objectively 'correct' resolution. (I'm judging by the two examples
    given.) I think this was necessary, so that there was 'room' for
    opinions to change. But it does make the conclusion less universal.
    
    For myself, I'd probably be swayed more by a tentative person on the
    subject of whether the gov't should provide day care, and be swayed
    more by a forceful person on the subject of whether VAX/VMS did truly
    symmetrical multiprocessing. (The latter is supposed to represent a
    question that's close to having an objectively correct, but not
    trivially obvious, answer.)
    
    I think I'd tend to be more swayed by a woman on the first kind of
    question, and unbiased on the second. The first case because I
    stereotype women as being more empathic and more in touch with social
    issues, and the second case because of my "absolutely sincere conscious
    belief in fairness". :-)
    
    Regards,
    Chuck

    in re .12
    
    What Newspaper would you suggest as more reliable than the Globe?
    The Herald perhaps?
    
    I find your remark rather absurd. I've read the Globe and other news
    media for well over 20 years and have found it to be, tho perhaps
    more liberal than some would care for in its reporting, to be accurate
    in its presentations.
    
    Your comment puts a reputable newspaper on the level with the
    super market tabloids, and that just isn't so.
    
    Bonnie

    re:  .0 et al
    
    I think this article is a bit misleading.  It starts out
    
    <<Social pyschologists now have hard evidence for what many working
      women already know:  If you want to wield influence in a man's
      world, you have to play dumb.>>
    
    Later in the article it states that the data was derived from Pschology
    students at a College in Worchester.
    
    I don't know where you went to College but I found it a HUGE leap from
    my University to the 'real world'.  To expect a survey of students to
    represent the working world is stretching it a bit.  I don't see that
    it fits my group.  The women in my group are *ALL* competent and know
    how to voice their opinions.  For me to think of them as 'tentative' is
    laughable.  This is not to say that they're fascists, simply strong
    willed people with something to say.  
    
    I don't read the Globe because I don't live in Mass. but this argument
    and their "hard evidence" seems pretty weak.
    
    I like working with women like Kathy Gallup.
    
    patrick

    Just one persons opinion but the Boston Globe is trash!
    
    

Well, based on the overwhelming and convincing arguments against the
Boston Globe, I have decided to cancel my Globe subscription!

;-)

john

    Not a bad idea at all. I cancelled the Globe a couple of
    years ago. 
    

    
    Yes, well, whatever.....
    
    What matters to me is that, whatever the pedigree of the paper, the
    quality of the research, students of experienced people.....
    ....the point that they are making can be seen in practice in daily
    life.
    
    *I* can see it happening around me.
    That, to my mind, makes it "valid".
    
    'gail

>The fact the the article come sfrom the Globe says enough...

>
>				"Hogwash!!!"


	'scuse me, I've been reading the guidelines, this should be something
	like "in my opinion this is hogwash".....or something sililar.


	Heather - amaized anyone can remember all 27 gudelines

    
    
    
    RE: .20
    
    Heather.  I've already written to the author stating that the comments
    about the Globe could be seen as violating Digital policy about
    negative statements made about other companies.  
    
    The author refused to delete (said they should be allowed to state
    their opinion).
    
    I did not pursue it with the moderators (for reasons I would rather not
    discuss).  If they saw it, they should question it as such.
    
    
    kath

    In the future, please *do* pursue something like this with the
    moderators if you feel the author of a note has violated a policy of
    this notesfile or the corporation.
    
    -Jody

    I find it highly ironic that they claim hard evidence in a soft
    science.
    
    As to their evidence:  from my personal experience at work, the
    more definate I am, the more I get listened to.  However, the
    engineering community at Digital has remarkably little to do 
    with the real world.
    
    Karen.

    
>    As to their evidence:  from my personal experience at work, the
>    more definate I am, the more I get listened to.  However, the
>    engineering community at Digital has remarkably little to do 
>    with the real world.
    
    Karen, now that's really brave, here in DECpark in the UK, we are
    about 50-50 engineering, and UK country group (really a business to market
    and sell services and products).

    I see many differences between the outlook of the different companies,
    However I am not always agreed with.


	Heather

I heard a discussion on the radio this morning that is related to this topic
and I thought it would be a good topic for our community...

The discussion centered around a woman asking a man out on a date (generic
feminazi view aside).  Now my questions are:

	1. How do you feel about asking a man out 
		or men - how would feel being asked out?

	2. What would you say to ask a man out?

	3. Would you ask a stranger out?

	4. What would you say to a stranger?

	5. What criteria would the person/situation have to met/be
	   in order to ask a man out.

I thought being the brave, daring and slightly crazy person that I am, that
I should give this a try.  Since I would be comfortable enough to ask 
a man I know out, I decided to try it on a total stranger in a restaurant.

First of all, it took me the whole meal to get up the guts and then I was so
nervous that I ran out of stream before I even asked him his name.  What I
did ask him was if he was single. And would he mind if a woman asked him
out for a drink.  He said he wouldn't so I gave him my card and asked him to
call and that I would like to buy him a drink sometime.  Then I ran away.  
Definitely an abortive attempt.  I realized later that I should have asked 
him if he was unattached. (Heavy sigh)  I'm trying to decide how would I
feel if a guy walked up to me to ask me out like that... flattered? Annoyed?
I'm not sure.  I think I am proud of the fact that I had the courage to at
least try and I would have met him for a drink & picked up the tab if he
had called.  I'm not sure if I'll try it again, though.

Well I'm interested to hear your thoughts/opinions.  Could you do it?  
Would you?  Have you & if so what happened?

Please no flames, my self-image is going through a shake out since my recent 
divorce. :-)

-Andrea

    Asking someone out is always hard.  Asking out a stranger can be either
    harder or easier...
    
    I once met a guy briefly at a class.  Looked up his name in the
    (school) phone book and called him up and asked him out.  It was very
    hard and it is the only time I have ever done anything like that.  he
    was immensely flattered and accepted.  We actually went out a couple of
    times, though nothing ever flew.
    
    Not quite as hard but almost happened this summer.  I met a woman at a
    net.gathering, was attracted to her, and then wrote her an email
    mesage.  Email is much easier for me, but it still was tough.  She
    answered back "yes" (though i got the feeling she wasn't as flattered
    as the guy in the previous paragraph) and we have been out quite a
    number of times.
    
    It is very hard for me to ask someone out.  I get jittery everytime
    until I ask myself: what am I so afraid of?  Rejection?  No, if s/he
    said no, then I would just say thank you and not worry about it. 
    Eventually I decided my fear was unfounded so I was going to ignore it. 
    It usually works out well.
    
    (I actually had the guts to ask a woman I had never met before, not
    even spoken to, to dance at a bar.  That was the hardest yet!!)
    
    D!

    Well, I'm not sure most men find it that easy to ask a stranger for a
    date.  It's like doing a cold boot on a system when you aren't sure where
    the bootfile came from.  Risky.
    
    It seems easier to make a suggestion that sounds more like an outing
    between friends.  Lunch is good for that.  Less pressure than a full-
    blown formal dinner date.
    
    If everybody seems to be having a good time on the first get-together,
    another one can be arranged.  Either person can initiate the first or
    subsequent events without risking too terribly much, I would think. If
    the beginning is casual and friendly, a refusal at any point can be
    fairly casual, too.
    
    Just some thoughts.
    
    -jt

re: .0:

          A new study has found that men are much more likely to have their
          minds changed by women who speak in a tentative, self-deprecating
          manner than by women who sound like they know what they're
          talking about.

Hmm, the recent discussion (in the Rathole and Procesing notes) about
Heather's communication style, or lack of it, offers another interesting
perspective on communication.

Martin.

    re: 29
    
    Do you think those offended would have been less so if a man had written
    the original remark?
    
    -jt

    
    
    >Do you think those offended would have been less so if a man had written
    >the original remark?
    
    
    Do you think those offended would have been less so if Heather had
    written her comment in a tentative way?
    
    
    kath

    I don't know much about what "social psychologists" do  (self-deprecating 
    phrase here), but in my humble opinion (another tentative and 
    self-deprecating phrase), social psychology isn't worth a dime, and 
    neither were any other "social sciences".  In fact, they are no science 
    at all.  It is rather a common sense that if one doesn't want to sound 
    like a jerk, one leaves some room for one's assertions.  Most experienced 
    speakers understand that.  In order to be effective, they had better not 
    drift too far away from the belief held by their audience. I think 
    (more self-doubt phrase here) most people have made up their minds.  
    The only effective way to effect any change, and I am not advocating we 
    do that (more disclaimers), is to first say that you agree 
    with them, but there is just one point you are not sure (very tentative), 
    and you have a few questions.  Then gradually led the other person to 
    his own discovery.  Personally (yet more), I think (still more) those 
    disclaimers and tentativeness are ways to avoid conflicts (in 
    notesfiles for example).  Just a few notes back someone suggested 
    Heather (?) to use phrases such as IMHO and etc. to avoid offending 
    people.  Try to read this very note without all the disclaimers and 
    "self-deprecating" phrases and see how it sounds.  It is a simple matter 
    of ettiquet and I doubt there is a sexual bias in it.  People dislike 
    obnoxious men as much as they dislike obnoxious women.
    
    Eugene
    
    P.S. Do I sound obnoxious here?  If I do, I apologize (yet still
    more self-doubt).

    re: 31
    
    > Do you think those offended would have been less so if Heather had
    > written her comment in a tentative way?
    
    It isn't my impression that anyone would rather have seen Heather be
    tentative in her original remark in "Circle of Stones."  Something
    more than a one-word invective amounting to a dismissal and a total
    devaluing of the topic was preferred (so the request was phrased in
    terms of the Womannotes policy that is supposed to address this.)
    
    It seems to me that the whole episode is being touted as yet another
    excuse to lash out at the whole community on the basis that a couple
    of people tried to find a way to tell Heather how much her remarks
    bothered them.  They did this in a tentative way themselves at first.
    Perhaps this is why the issue is now residing on a flag pole as yet
    another burning reason why the whole notesfile should be despised.
    Apparently, this sort of thing has been happening here for some time.
    
    While our planet is gearing up for war, it shouldn't surprise any of
    us to see a simple request from a few people escalate into a possible
    major crisis here fueled by pre-existing disputes.
    
    A wartime mentality on the home front is understandable right now.
    
    -jt

	Well, as people are praising my communications skills, I thought I might
	add a word or three.


	I find the more tentative I become, the more I am misunderstood, and the
	less I am listened to.

	Now, when I am tentative, I don't even find out I'm being misunderstood
	until maybe a long time afterwards.

	So I'm not, and any misunderstandings can usually be ironed out on the
	spot.

	In my work, I can't afford to be misunderstood, often I have to persuade
	people to take diffeent paths than they had planned on, I have to be 
	direct, and I have to KNOW that I am being understood. If I am 
	misunderstood, it could cost the corporation a great deal of money, it 
	causes confusion, and it puts us back large steps in our ability to 
	use what we sell.

	All the words like - I think that - I beleive that - In my opinion -
	I feel..... etc. are not words that will encourage people to have the 
	confidence in you to change their previous decision.

	just my six bobs worth

	Heather

re: .31
    >    Do you think those offended would have been less so if Heather had
    >    written her comment in a tentative way?
    
    In a gentler way, in a less judgmental way, yes.  Tentative to me feels
    like "I don't really know if I mean this or not, but if you want me to
    mean it tell me and I'll follow your lead...since you know what you're
    doing and I, of course, don't."  
    
re: .34
    
>       All the words like - I think that - I beleive that - In my opinion -
>	I feel..... etc. are not words that will encourage people to have the 
>	confidence in you to change their previous decision.
    
    In this notesfile, it seems that many people already have their minds
    made up - about war, about abortion, about feminism.  It is rare,
    though not unheard of, for people to change their minds.  Sharing
    opinions is important to me because then I know more about people, I
    learn about them, and I hear them and learn about myself.  The only
    thing womannotes has changed my mind on is the rich, intelligent, warm,
    supportive quality women can have in my life, and the fact that I can
    be part of a supportive, caring, growing community of men and women
    that share some common ideas, and a single corporate entity, but very
    little else....
    
    Vive la difference!
    
    -Jody

    Much of what goes on in Notes would not be especially persuasive in a
    business environment.
    
    Imagine what it might cost Digital if any of us responded to a customer
    "Hogwash!" or "Codswallop!" (then added, "Do people actually believe
    what you just said???")
    
    In notes, it would seem pretty unrealistic to expect to change people's
    minds about something, especially when the subject has political or
    religious connotations.  I've never had the impression that most noters
    count on this happening, nor even care about it very much.
    
    Political and religious discussions are attractive for other reasons,
    usually.
    
    -jt

    
    re .34, Heather:
    
    FWIW, I'm glad you explained this.  It's helpful because at
    least now I can see where you're coming from, even though we
    may still disagree.
    

    Tsk, tsk.
    
    One way� of being non-assertive, while getting someone to change
    his� mind, is to reply to his authoritative (but incorrect) declaration
    with:  "Oh.  That hasn't been my experience.  What I have seen is
    blah, blah, blah."  Now, if I'm clever and/or lucky, I'll be able
    to add in an authority-softening "Now, perhaps, if the situation
    were really mumble-foo, you might have thought you were seeing the
    situation you described, but because of the frammis, that wouldn't
    have been the case at all."
    
    This gets the person to *think* -- if for no other reason than to
    be able to be sure when saying "No, that couldn't have been the
    way it was because blah, blah, blah." and thinking is the win-win
    situation.
    
    						Ann B.
    
    � Instead of using "The way".
    � One gender chosen solely for ease of expression.  :-}

    I think we can all agree that .32, despite its tentative apologetic
    self-decprecating phrases, is very assertive.  This brings about the
    point on those "social sciences".  The method used (described in .0) is
    meaningless.  You can't measure a person's assertiveness in a
    particular conversation by the number of these phrases used.  The tone
    of the conversation and the way ideas are brought up and the "rhythm"
    of the conversation (all those things beyond measurement) carry more 
    weight in the intangible "assertive meter".  Sometime a mere interruption 
    of a sentence can turn an impression of "highly assertive" to 
    "down right obnoxious".
    
    Eugene

I thought I'd read or heard somewhere that Japanese had an entirely different
word set for women. One that was made up of primarily tentative and non-assetive
type words. And that it was frowned upon for women to use male language. Does
anybody know about this? liesl

> I thought I'd read or heard somewhere that Japanese had an entirely different
> word set for women. One that was made up of primarily tentative and non-assetive
> type words. And that it was frowned upon for women to use male language. Does
> anybody know about this? liesl

Japanese definitely does have a different vocabulary, word choice, and
inflection for women. Differentiated enough that there is a distinct "woman's
language". It is considered declasse for a woman to use men's language. There
are also distinct "languages" for talking to a superior, an equal, and an
inferior. Japanese in general is "tentative and non-assertive" by Western
standards. I don't know specifically if woman's language is more so.

The languages aren't really all that different, it's often just a matter of
pronunciation, accent, and inflection. English has similar things, but perhaps
not as pronounced.

	-- Charles

    there is definite changes in vocabulary among Japanese men and women...
    Women's language is much more subtle, smooth, not so direct or
    assertive as men's language.  Japanese men highly value a woman's
    femineity, delicacy, tact, and value assertiveness, directness in a
    man's talk.  A woman in Japan does not need to fight with men to reach
    their same level, as each have their respective places in society and
    each are proud of their places.  A woman would stress her faminity to a
    man instead of her "asertiveness" if attempting to impress a man... 
    the later would put her at a dissadvantage instead!
    Women are not dominated by men either,
    women do manage their husband's income (decide how much spending money
    the husband can have) and run the house, "she" decides to which school
    the kids should go to, "she" decides how to manage her house and when
    to go out with friends, or work, etc, but of course, if she works, she
    still is responsible for the smooth household management... women are,
    and have been for many hundred of years, very well educated and have
    given access to universities as same as any male.  The majority of
    women do stay at home and do not work, but I believe that that is due
    to own choosing, japanese family is very close, very nuclear, and
    requires a full time mother or wife, to achieve that. Women who work,
    (and I know quite a few) have maids living at home and most important,
    either Grandma or Grandpa are there too, to keep an eye on things...
    A Japanese woman treats her husband with lots of respect, is a great
    housewife and mother, and they are not as defenseless as we think
    of them... they are proud of their gender as much as men are proud of
    themselves and both get each other's respect...
    we may feel sorry for Japanese women but in reality... they feel sorry
    for many of us too! (the way we have to struggle to do all, career,
    house, children, etc, etc. is no fun in their own eyes)

    I've copied 618.25, .26, and .27 into their own new topic about "would
    you ask a man out"....
    
    -Jody