POWER, SEX &
NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part 1 => N. Henley: Power, Sex and Nonverbal Communication
I: Introduction
II: Touch
III: Eye contact & visual behavior
IV: Space
V: Body movements
VI: Gestures of dominance & submission
VII: Power & gender
Part 2 => R. Lakoff: Language and woman's place
I: Introduction
II: Talking like a lady
colors
swear words
adjectives
tag-question / tag-orders
III: Talking about women
euphemism
marriage problem
individualis?
Discriminations in sexual mixed groups
IV: Conclusion
Part 1 => Henley: Noverbal Communication - Introduction
In our society nonverbal communication plays an important role. With gestures, postures, looks, physical space, facial expressions and our voice we can show our emotions towards other people . But also our style, clothes, hair etc. signalize our life attitude towards others.
It is also an attractive feature because many different disciplines are captured by it: psychology, linguistics, antropology, psychiatry and sociology. Each of them has a favourite topic.
On the one hand we can use it at an unconcious level- what happens most of the time- , but on the other hand it is also possible for us to strengthen the meaning of our words by using it. " We are constantly reading each other, or trying to, using all the informaiton we can get, and we can get it from a lot more sources than just the words that pass between us." (Siegman / Feldstein: Nonverbal behavior and communication) It is a general code that exists in our society. For example if somebody laughs everybody knows, that this person is happy at that moment. Or if people raise their eyebrows they show that they are astonished. We can see this behaviour in the world of animals, too.
The difference between verbal communication and nonverbal communication is that verbal communication is taught in school whereas one has to learn nonverbal communication, the meaning and the usage of it by experience. The problem that appears here is that people can interprete it in different and also wrong ways.But in fact, nonverbal communication overpowers the meaning of words by 4.3 times! Even writers and poets have long been awar of nonverbal messages: "The face is the mirror of the mind and eyes without speaking confess secrets of the heart" ( St. Jerome); "Each of our gestures carries the weight of a commitment" (Satre). Generally we can say that verbal communication expresses our thoughts and nonverbal communication is there to show our emotions.
With my report I would like to give some examples of nonverbal communication. I will especially concentrate on the topics:
1st: How is dominance shown in nonverbal communication?
2nd: Nonverbal communication between men and women
II: TOUCH
People often find reasons to touch each other. Imagine, you meet somebody you didn't know before. How do you greet him? Yes, you shake his / her hands. You touch this person, even if you don't know him / her so well. But you also touch people who are close to you: friends, parents and children.
It is difficult to do research on the touching behavior, but some studies have given us good results. In this chapter I will present some examples of touching behavior in human society.
Who touches whom and why?
In the following list you can see quite easily who touches whom most:
men => women
older people => younger people
superordinates => subordinates
How can we explain this? There is a general statement that says:
"People of higher status are allowed to touch people of lower status."
Let's focus on some examples to illustrate this determination.
There is a boss and a secretary. The boss is male and old, the secretary female and young. He touches her whenever he wants to and she has to accept it as a normal behavior, since she is the subordinate, the younger one and the woman. We can find this example also in the relationships between professor-student, host-servant, doctor-patient etc.
A young man and a young woman are on their first date. The man makes the first step. Why? Because he is male, the one of the higher status.
But is there also another explenation? Popular writers have found for touching a sexual explenation or they see it in a context of intimacy. "Touching is equated with sexual intent, either consciously, or at a less conscious level." (Jourard and Rubin, 1986) So we can say that touch is something like a preform of sex and since men have greater "sex drives" they are often the one who touch first.
Another explenation can be found in the results of studies of mother-child interaction. They report, that little girls from age six months on are much more touched then little boys of the same age. So we can assume that women are treated like little children when they are touched.
But touch can also be just a sign for friendship. People who know each other touch a lot without any intents.
III: EYE CONTACT & VISUAL BEHAVIOR
Visual behaviour plays a particularly important role in regulating social interaction and establishing and maintaning dominance relationships. In studys was found out that , in general, staring at another person is a dominance gesture while breaking eye contact or not looking is a sign of submission. It is also a common fact, that women tend to look more at the other person than vice versa. To explain this let's take an example of nonhuman animal societies. There subordinate individuals generally direct a large amount of visual attention toward dominant members of the group, exept while the dominant members gaze at them. Dominant members visually monitor other mmbers of the group more freely, but they bive much lss attention to any one subordinate animal. Another reason can be, that men tend to talk more and the listener in a conversation is the one, who looks more than vice versa.
There have been some studies, which try to show visual behavior during conversations.
One common finding is that women have been observed to engage in more overall looking, more looking while listening and more looking while speaking.
A further way the sexes may differ in terms of visual behaviours is the feeling of being obeserved. It was found out that females were less comfortable than males when not able to see their conversational partner. Unlike males, females preferred to see teir partners even when they could not be seen. In these situations women decreased their speech by 40 % while men increased their amount of speech by 40 %.
Staring can also be a sign of dominance and looking away a subordinate gesture. Study this example: " A husband and his wife are at a party. The wife says something that the husband does not want her to say. He quickly tightens the muscles around his jaw and gives her a rapid but intense direct stare. The wife, who is actually sensitive to the gestures of the man on whom she is dependent, immediatly gives off sme other gesture of submission which communicates acqesence to her husband and reduces his aggression." With eye contact the man can make his wife clear, that he is the superordinate. She has no rights at that moment. So we can say, that staring is characterized as threat.
In conclusion I can say that women are the ones who look more and to be looked at more, but they are also the first to look away, because of their subordinate status. Men can show their power and dominance through eye contact, such as gazing or staring.
IV: SPACE
Let's focus now on the physical space, which individuals use in their interactions with others and how it influences their behavior.
What has been found out in studies between men and women and their space behavior? First we can say, that females maintain closer interpersonal distances than males. This has been demonstrated in a variety of ways: by seating position - females preferred sitting corner to corner - or side-by-side. The sex of the other person always played an important role. It was found out, that women tended to sit closer to other women than other men.
Another interesting aspect in the territoriality behavior was shown in this experiment: It was found out, that when a man and a woman meet on the street, the woman is the one who moves first to the other side on most of the cases. In 12 of 19 cases the woman moved, in 4 cases both moved and in only 3 cases the man moved to the other side. This again shows us, that women are not allowed to get into the personal space of a man, since they are the subordinates in our society.
But when talking to athoer people, women are approcached more closely than man. So it is allowed to break into the personal space of a woman, but not vice versa.
V: BODY MOVEMENTS
Can dominance, power and status been shown through body movements? The answer is simply "yes". Generally dominance is conveyed with behaviors implying strength, comfort-relaxation, and fearlessness, whereas submissiveness is communicated with behaviors implying weakness, smallness, discomfort, tnesion and fearfullness. An expanded range of movement or increased freedom of movement also conveys dominance. Conversely, a constricted closed position a range of movement, hunched body ( reducing one's sze), downward-turned head, or tense, rigid posture, or a forward lean, all convey submission. Men "stresse width" in sitting and standing positions to show their status, while women try to use positions where they show that they are a lady. For example women never sit with legs wide spread.
VI: GESTURES OF DOMINANCE AND SUBMISSION
As I mentioned before gestures of dominance can be: staring, pointing or touching, which are mostly done by men. Submessive gestures can be: lowering or avertin the eyes, stopping action or speech or just smiling. But men can also show their dominance in other situations. Let's take an example, everybody knows: A man a woman have just married. Before they enter their new house, the men lifts his wife up and carries her into it. With this gesture he shows his strenght. He also makes the women clear, that he is the one, who has more power. The women, the subordinate, is dependet on her husband at that moment, and maybe forever.
Men can also show their dominance by swining women at dances or interrupting somebody while speaking.
VII: POWER AND GENDER
As I have pointed out before, men more likely display dominance gestures than women, and women more likely to display gestures of submission than men. But what happens, if women do display dominance gestures, will the gestures be interpreted as exerting dominance as men's are, or to the same extent? Nancy M. Henley tried to find answers for these questions. For her study she wrote down some hypotheses:
Dominance gestures will be less likely to be interpreted as ones of dominance when displayed by females than when displayed by males. This effect will be strongest for dominance displayed by females to males and by males to females.
Dominance gestures when displayed by females will be more likely to receive a sexual interpretation than the same gestures when displayed my males.
Female subjects will be more likely to perceive male dominace than will male subjects: male subjects will be more likely tan female subjects to interpret female dominance gestures as sexual.
Dominance gestures have an additive effect, that is, the greater the number of dominance gestures displayed by someone at one time, the more dominant that person will be perceived as being.
The degree of dominance attributed to the targets of dominance gestures will be lower, the more dominance is being displayed to them by another.
Several major hypotheses of this study were supperoted by the results: Dominance was attributed more readily to males, and sexuaity to females, making the same gestures. Characteristic gestures for men, which seem to be "natural" for them, are considerd sexy when used by women. Even a husky voice or withholding of information - the woman of mystery - are seen as sexual invitations.
Part 2 => Lakoff: Language and woman's place - Introduction
We have already pointed out that the subordinate social status of women leads them to the use of a different nonverbal communication than man. But is there also a special language for women? The answer is simply `yes'. The margianlity and the powerlessness of women is also reflected in 1st: The way women are expected to speak - women's language, and 2nd: The ways in which women are spoken of. With this essay we want to show the main differences among men and women.
First of all, lets explain, why there exist differences. As we will later will point out, we will see, that womens language is a weak language. This has a simple reason. Women are denied access to power and they are made to feel that they deserve such treatment. Little girls are already taught to talk like a lady, if not people will make fun of her and she will be criticized as unfeminine. If she does learn the womens language, than she is unable to take part in a serious discussion, because she is ridiculed as unable to tink clearly. She is kept in her line, in her place by parents and friends. But lets explain the problem with a couple of examples.
I: Talking like a lady
You can start with a simple experiment. Let a man and a woman look into the sky and let them define the color. The man will proably say “It's blue!”, the woman will answer “The sky has a light shade of blue, mixed with a little bit of purple and white!” Women make far more precise discriminations in naming colors. They know colors like, beige, ecrue, aquarmarine, lavender, which are used in their active vocabulary, whereas it is absent from the males vocabulasry. For men such a discussion about colors is amusing. It is trivial and irrelevant to the real world. Since women are not expected to make decisions on important matters they are relegated the non-cruicial decision: colors.
Another good example for showing the differneces between mens and womens language are swear words. Men more often use words like: shit, damn, fuck… These are strong words, which show their position of srengt in the real world. By shoing their emotions they are seen as real individuals in their own rights. Women on the contrary say things like: Oh dear, goodness, oh fudge… They use weak works, without a real meaning. It prevents them from being taken seiously as an individual. Women are allowed to fus and complain but only a man can below in rage. Imagine how funny it has to look like, when f.e. the kitchen is burning and the women says:” Oh goodes, the kitchen is burning!”. This sounds so weak, that it is funny in the eyes of men. But this picture is also changing. Women start using males language more. This is analogous to the fact that men's jobs are being sought by women but men still seldom become secretairies or housewifes.
Another difference can be shown in the use of adjectives. There are certain neutral adjectives, like great, terrific, cool, neat. But there exist a few womens adjectives: adorable, charming, sweet, lovely. Women have the choice if they use the neutral or the women words. But these women adjectives are also used my academic men. Imagine a truck drive and a professor are talking to each other. The professor says” what a lovely day it is!” The truck driver will probably laugh about the womenish behaviour.
The most interesting sign for a womans language is the use of tag-questions and tag orders. What are tag-questions? They are a midway between an outright statemtent and a yes-no question. This can be something like “It is hot, isn't it?” One gives a statement when one has confidence in his knowledge. You ask a question, when you know, that you are lacking o knowledge on some point. The tag-question, is a middle thing. It is between both. So we can assume, that women are weak, they have no won view, they aren't really sure about what they are saying. This shows that you cannot take a woman serious or trustin her with any responsibilities since she cannot make up her mind. Tag-orders can probably be interpreted in another way. Tag-orders can for example be “Would you pleas be so kind and close the door?!” instead of saying “Close the door!”. So with these tag-orders, women try to be more polite towards others. They also leave a decision open to anyone else. It does not force a belief.
Other signs for a womans language ar aplogizing, hestitaion or disparabingin own statemen “I don't know anything about it, but…” All the examples that were menitoned before, show the weak language of a woman. With this weak language, they show their powerless status in society. The expressions reflect the way women are treted nowadays.
We have focused now on how women speak. But is there also a special way, how women are spoken of?
II Talking about women
We all know what an euphemism is: an euphemism is supposed to put a better face on something people find uncomfortable. It is a more elegant terminology for things we don't like to pronounce. We don't say `toilet', but instead we have inventend many other words to describe this place where you have to go many times during your lifetime. We say restroom, bathroom, comfort station, lavatory, water-closet, loo and all the others, but we seldem say the word `toilet'. Another example is the word `Afro-American'. Instead of calling a bleack person Nigger ( which actually just means `black', so it is nothing bad), we talk about Afro-American people, since it sounds much better. The same is with women - oh pardon ladys! We seldom use the word women, since women is related with a sexual being. So we can say, that lady is an euphemism for women. Why do we say things like `cleaning-lady'? We just want to get rid of the words we do not like. The masculine counterpart, gentleman, is seldom used.
What else can we point out? How are women treated in society? As we have seen in the nonverbal communication, women are often the subordinates. They achief status in soceity by ther father, husband or lover. Men are defined in terms of what they do in the world, women in terms of the men with whom they are associated. They are no autonomous individuals, but `John's wife' or `Harry's girlfriend'. This problem starts especially with their marriage. At the end of the ceremony it is said `I now pronounce you man and wife'. The man stays a man, even after his marriage, but the woman is not a woman anymore, but an appendix to her husband. She is defined as his way in society now.
Another thing is the way, a man and a woman are named. If you see a name somwhere like `Johnson' you think of a man. If it is a woman there must stand `mrs' or `ms' before. Men don't need more than their name. Why is there a difference made between `mrs' and `ms'? Why don't we have such a seperation in males names? It is easy to explain: when a man doesn't marry he is enjoying sexual activity. But when a woman doesn' t marry she is seen as sexually undesirable, prissy and frigid. Mr doesn't idetifies the marital status, but Mrs or Miss do. A woman's character and social station depends on her marital status.
Another discrimination is the naming of sexually mixed groups. We say things like ` Everyone takes his seat', if we speak to men and women. Why are we all man and mankind? Why not woman and womandkind? Or Human? All these words contain `men'`? Women are treated like noexistend, like the inferior species.
III: Conclusion
All these differences between men and women reflect the different roles of women and man in our society. Even if the pictures is beginning to change: a woman is still the subordinate, the one who has no right to say something important in the real world. They are treated as sexual objects in many cases. Behaviour, which is normal for a man is seen as a sexual invitation if done by a woman. They are kept in their line by the centers of power, which surround them - Men.
REFERENCES
Steve L. Ellyson / John F. Dovidio (1985): Power, Dominace and Nonverbal Behavior, Springer -Verlag, New York
Clara Mayo / Nancy M. Henley (1981): Gender and Nonverbal Behavior, Springer-Verlag, New York
Robin Lakoff: Language in womans place
Aron W. Siegman / Stanley Feldstein (1987): Nonverbal Behavior and Communication, Lawrence Erlabum Associates, New Jersey