In the world today people choose not to be simply classified as female and male anymore. While this has changed for the better for people to identify themselves however they please , with pronouns comes specific grammar. In Dennis Baron's essay “Facebook Multiples Genders but Offers Users the same Three Tired Pronouns” the author speaks upon the different weighs between gender and grammar. Therefore I claim that as gender is extended correct grammar should follow. Barons essay argues that the availability of gender preference is higher followed by the limit on grammar towards gender.
While they value the elements of each other’s “worlds,” they emphasize the elements differently. Males tend to be more direct in their communication while females prefer indirection and expressiveness. Contributions to my worldly lens were
Here I referred as men and women, it mostly represent the actual gender. Sometimes it gets vice-versa like whoever speaks or communicates like I have mentioned earlier, then they will come under that category. Thus I want to conclude my essay by saying our society plays a major role in making the mind of men and women to think in a particular way and if they try to change their view , then they are made fun of their ideas instead of thinking why only few changes when everyone goes in a single way. It’s not necessary to follow the society when you are having your own view and know the way to
One of these perspectives is analyzing communication through gender. In the book, You Just Don’t Understand, Deborah Tannen (1990) popularized the term “genderlect” to describe the way in which men and women communicate with each other. She suggested that men and women have different styles of conversing, forming two distinct dialects. In a review of Tannen’s book, DeFrancisco (1992) attributed the differing communication styles of men and women to the respective cultures in which they grow up. Because of such gender differences, misunderstanding between men and women creates a gap in the communication process.
A society has determined what men and women are good at, actually influences the abilities that different genders can posses, just by stereotyping the roles and cognitive capacities of the gender. The response to counterargument is that yes, there are stereotypes that exist in current society, but the ones the body wired a certain way, it would be very hard for it to change the mapped out by DNA and chromosomes and hormones cognitive abilities. The stereotypes of the society would not be able to change the increased level of testosterone that a woman possesses, which increases her abilities to solve mathematical and spatial problems on a higher level than average man. The same way as the stereotypes would not be able to change the chromosome that one got due to the process of
The resulting hypothesis is that women will be judged by male and female survey takers more harshly. This could maybe have the effect of causing women to be more tolerant towards each other and thus make them to judge female politicians involved in scandals less harshly. The hypothesis just mentioned is based on Taifel´s Minimal Group paradigm in which it is said that group affiliation might be a basic custom in human behaviour. The result of it is the group favouritism effect. However, this could be moderated by the System justification Theory, which says that in-group bias is weaker among low status groups, as they rationalise their low status and then discriminate against their own group.
Despite inequity, there is a myriad of comparable traits that are shared by humans which portrays our personality. It is in one's power to decide whether or not to conform to society. Indeed both texts include many similarities and differences such as the stereotypical roles set on each gender, their search for individuality and their desired privileges. While approaching adulthood, many people encounter obstacles which lead their understanding to a fact that gender stereotypes do not only occur for women but, for men as well. The narrator in Boys and Girls discovers the societies’ views and expectations of her.
People of different generations experienced things differently and each of them had their own thinking; because of the difference in experiences, one might view things differently based on their own knowledge and experiences. A study was done in the United States, comparing older and younger adults’ attitudes toward feminism found that individuals of different generations perceived feminism differently even though they were from a similar cultural background (Bettencourt, Vacha-Haase, & Byrne, 2011). The study showed that the young adults had a significantly more lenient attitudes toward feminism as compared to the older adults. One of the reason that contributed to the finding was that the young adults were born in the time where they grew up learning that both men and women were equal whilst the older adults went through stages where gender inequality were supposed to be a norm and equality was just a dream (Bettencourt, Vacha-Haase, & Byrne, 2011).
Half of each group were anonymous and the other half wore name tags. Anonymous hooded participants were slightly more aggressive than others; Anonymous nurse participants were significantly less aggressive than other participants. This suggests that anonymity might lead to more conformity to group norms, rather than disregard for social rules and negative behavior disorganized (Dixon & Mahendran, 2012, p 10). De-individuation theory has been studied only in societies with strong individualistic values. It is questionable how applicable the theory might be to non-western societies that accentuate collectivistic values over individualistic ones since de-individuation suggests that being part of a crowd removes one’s sense of separation from others, personal rationality and individuality.
During my literature review, I have found that regardless of time scale, nationalist-discriminative discourse is more widespread than the discourse which defends race as an artificial fact. There are studies which some of them too extremist such as eugenics or racist theories developed by Gumplowicz, Le Conte, Le Bon and Lapouge (Hawkins 1998:186-202). Even though, contemporary literature is softer than earlier ones, there are still studies which emphasize hierarchies among races. Dawkins is one of the famous contemporary contributors of discriminative discourse by referring biological differences, especially genes and ignoring other factors while classifying individuals according to them. The names and theories above, which I would like to criticize in my dissertation, establish the basis of widespread discriminative discourse.