Why can’t men and women understand each other
By Dr Bill Wilkie
A psychiatrist thinks one reason is that some women haven’t softened their negotiating methods in the light of their increased authority.
Many women in our society haven’t yet fully appreciated how much power has shifted from men to women in the last thirty five years. On the other hand, most men are now convinced they have less authority than their grandfathers did. They feel more obliged to listen carefully to any complaints their wives might make, and comply with them where possible.
Unfortunately, many women still behave as if they’re arguing from a position of weakness. As a result, they tend to overstate their feelings and their resentment, with sometimes quite disastrous effects on negotiations.
In my experience, many women are quite unaware of how their arguing methods inhibit the process of gaining some common understanding. Women are able to negotiate with other women quite well. They understand each other. But many otherwise highly intelligent women seem to lack an understanding of even the most basic aspects of male behaviour.
For example, it is normal for a 15 year old boy to begin to challenge his father’s authority. It happens in nature, it happens in human families. The teenage son becomes very territorial, and stands up to his father on some issue. The normal healthy outcome is that the boy’s new-found strength, will prove unequal to the father’s self-confidence and experience. By losing the battle, the boy will learn valuable lessons on gamesmanship and brinkmanship, while the father’s role of strong family protector is affirmed. The father knows and understands where his son’s challenge to his authority comes from. After all, he tried it on with his Dad. He knows that for the emotional health of the family, he, the father, must win.
Unfortunately, all too often these days, the mother fails to recognize this antagonism between father and son represents a normal healthy phase of development. Her feminist thinking focuses on her husband’s aggressiveness, she convinces herself the son has a real grievance, and so lends her support to criticism of her husband. This tips the balance of power against the father’s dominance, and he feels his authority being eroded. He therefore over-reacts to the boy’s challenging his dominant role. The mother may then perceive her husband as acting irrationally, and as a result, increases her criticism.
In some cases, the fifteen year old son may actually win the confrontation with the aid of his confused mother. The situation is now in real crisis. The rules of challenge and forfeit in nature require the defeated male to vacate the area. It’s not uncommon these days, to find middle-aged men thinking about running away from home, as a direct consequence of an adolescent authority challenge gone wrong.
Many men find themselves completely blocked and frustrated when trying to discuss these issues with their wives, because men and women use different discussion techniques.
It’s fascinating to see how men and women, both educated in the same system in the same schools, watching the same TV programmes, can use language so differently. For example, “why?” is interpreted by a man as “please give me a verbal explanation now”, whereas “why?” can be used for a woman to express herself, without necessarily requiring an explanation.
Whereas their grandmothers might say something like, “How I miss my people at home!”, the modern miss would tend to say, “Why do I keep thinking about my folks all the time?” If there happens to be some male within earshot, he may consider he is obliged to attempt some amateur psychology: “Well, perhaps it’s such a long time since you’ve seen them, you’re forgetting what they look like.”
Because women are over-using “why?” these days, men frequently find themselves irritated by having to answer what they think are silly, redundant, or self-answering questions.
But most of the misunderstanding comes about from the way women conduct themselves in a discussion. By opening up with a strong statement at the beginning of a discussion, they may strangle it at birth. For example, a woman might open a discussion with something like: “This marriage is heading for divorce!” She fully expects the discussion will proceed in the same way as it would if he were a woman: Gee, honey, don’t say that! Well, we never go out any more! I’ve been too busy at work. I get tired! Too busy for your family? I suppose I have been neglecting you!
Instead, it is very likely the conversation will go like this: This marriage is heading for divorce! I suppose your mind’s made up! For a long time! (He lapses into a stunned silence)
A man attempting to discuss something with his wife, will be observing the rules of male negotiating. Under male rules, strong words mean a challenge to authority and may quickly lead to violence. When someone makes a strong statement, it might be best to postpone the discussion until you can decide whether to call his bluff.
A strong opening statement might signal to a man that this is a non-negotiable position he will need to go away and think a lot about, before risking a confrontation. This is why men who want to achieve some compromise never start with strong statements. They only use strong statements to stop the discussion, to define different opinions which on that occasion are regarded as non-negotiable.
Men regard the period between discussions as the time when previously strongly held ideas may weaken enough for compromise. Rarely do men think that strongly held views can be altered during an argument. That would look too much like one person is dominating the other. Therefore, if a woman opens up a discussion with a strong statement, her husband assumes they’ll have to agree to differ until they can each give it a great deal of thought.
Modern women are often genuinely mystified when a man just clams up at the beginning of a discussion. All they can conclude is that he cares so little about her, he isn’t interested in what she’s feeling. Meanwhile, the now almost mute husband is feeling resentful and humiliated, angered and frustrated. It seems to him (and he’s quite wrong) that she has so little regard for him that she would risk the relationship in order to gain a position of dominance.
Men and women use language so differently that often the first step in resolving family difficulties is to try to get them to use the same negotiating method. My experience is that it is fruitless trying to get men to accept the female system of trading overstatements and negotiating down from a position of strength. This stirs up too much anger in the men. Some intelligent women have been able to use the male method of understating the point until all avenues of compromise are exhausted. However, most women find the male method too slow and imprecise. They lose patience.
Usually, the couple may have to agree on some other system, like debating an issue for two minutes at a time, with the right of reply and rebuff guaranteed without interruption, and insistence on objective language throughout. This tends to suit the males anyway.
Where women are willing to try it, the two goodies, one baddy, one goody technique can be very useful. If you want to make some complaint, say two nice things first, then make your complaint, but finish with some compliment: Henry, you are a lovely man! You are the greatest thing since sliced bread! I do wish you would put your dirty clothes IN the laundry basket instead of AROUND the laundry basket. I know you’ll cooperate, because you’re such a fine person.
Those women who have been able to use it, find negotiations go more smoothly than with the old stop-start, sulk, stop-start method.
Dr Bill Wilkie is a Brisbane psychiatrist and participant in the MarriageWorks Video series. This article is printed by permission of W.G. & S.M. Wilkie Publishers. Copyright © Dr William Wilkie, 1991.
