jimboboz ([info]jimboboz) wrote,
@ 2007-03-16 15:30:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Gender and writing differences
Recently I've been trying to write some better fiction, and roleplay better. Part of that has been to try out characters I've not been good at before. So I went and looked up to see if people had studied and found gender differences in writing. Apparently they have.


Gender, Genre, and Writing Style in Formal Written Texts (small pdf download)

Communicative style and gender differences in computer-mediated communications

The first tells me that women have more "involved" writing, and men more "informational" (so I guess this email proves I'm a boy!). So women use more often I, you, she and the reflexive forms of those; men more often use we, you, and it. Women in general more often put gender in (he & she), men prefer it, they, etc. Women use more dialogue in their fiction, and in both fiction and non-fiction more often quote others; men do monologues (yay!) Women use present-tense more often, I assume to give more immediacy for that "involved" aim.

The second paper talks about usenet... scary, eh. The authour writes,
Herring has investigated gender and communicative style on several electronic mailing lists [...] In all three studies, she and her colleagues found two distinct styles of postings, which she called "adversarial" and "supportive/attenuated". She notes that men and women use both styles, but that men tend towards adversarial and women towards supportive/ attenuated and the extremes of each are used "almost exclusively by one gender and not the other". In the remainder of this paper, these will be referred to as M- and F-styles, respectively. Since the characteristics of flaming and M-style speech overlap to some extent, Sproull and Kiesler's finding suggests that electronic communications may be more likely to be M-style.
[...]
It is hypothesized that there will be a link between communicative style and participation: women will be less likely to participate in a discussion with a heavily M-style and, conversely, men will be less likely to participate in a discussion with a heavily F-style. If this pattern is seen, it can be inferred that communicative style does indeed differentially affect individuals' choices whether or not to participate in a particular conference above and beyond the influence of topic.
A couple things struck me about this. The first was that the authour's first sentence reinforced what the first paper said. It was, "she and her colleagues", rather than "the authour" as I naturally and thoughtlessly just wrote. The second was "M-style", made me think of women and therpgsite...
So anyway, this is what I'm up to with trying to write and roleplay better... How about the rest of you? I'm sure there are cultural differences, too, but I'd like to try to get a good grip on the gender differences before dealing with them.


- tool to learn where visitors to this LJ come from - Geo Visitors Map



(Post a new comment)


[info]gbsteve
2007-03-16 09:31 am UTC (link)
My wife is fond of pointing out that men tend to communicate to impart information and women emotion. I'm not sure it's so straight cut.

I think that the emotional content of men's language tends to be less explicit and you wouldn't necessarily realise it was there unless you knew what to look for. Also men often see emotion as a barrier to communication. "I don't care if you like me, just tell me where I can get product X". Of course, this is amplified in the UK where emotion is typically much less on show than in the US.

(Reply to this)


[info]gbsteve
2007-03-16 10:31 am UTC (link)
Of course, this is stereotypical behaviour and doesn't necessarily apply to indiviuals. I think people tend to exhibit behaviour and communicate about what their focuses are and that's what you need to sort out first in fiction and roleplaying. Once you've got the motivation, interpretation comes next, which is where styles apply.

That said, you can also get to character, particularly in gaming, by reacting in a certain style and then see what that means about your PCs motivations.

Also, I'm not sure you can separate culture and gender quite so neatly. How many WASPs do you see wearing a burqa?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jimboboz
2007-03-16 12:42 pm UTC (link)
Of course the general does not determine the individual. But the general still remains useful.

Gender and cuture can't be separated neatly, but you have to make some separations for the sake of a discussion, or else each discussion would become longer than a doctoral thesis. So we take a rough separation.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]johnmorrow
2007-03-19 11:53 pm UTC (link)
You are aware that the very idea that there are detectable differences between the sexes is considered sexist and offensive in certain circles, right? Just a friendly warning.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jimboboz
2007-03-20 03:56 am UTC (link)
Yes, but I'm already bannzorzed from rpg.net.

I usually find that no-one is offended by the idea that men and women communicate or otherwise behave differently; they're only offended if you suppose men and women have different motivations and natures. For example, if you say that men will tend to make bold statements, and women soften their statements with "maybe" and "I think," few people will be offended, and many agree. But if you say that men make bold statements because they really know, and women soften their statements because they're more ignorant, then naturally people will be offended. If you say that men tend to be noisier about their desire for sex, no-one worries; if you say that women don't enjoy sex as much as men, people think you're a cocksmock.

Men and women behave a bit differently, but their motivations and nature are much the same, I don't think this is seriously disputed. Whether the different behaviour is cultural and varies, or phsyiological and universal, that's an open question; I think it's almost entirely cultural.

Anyway, apart from rpg.net, no other online communities I'm interested in get upset about such statements. Certainly individual bloggers will get upset, but those are the sorts who usually ban from their blog anyone who disagrees with them, so you've no hope of not offending them anyway.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]jhkimrpg
2007-03-21 08:48 pm UTC (link)
I agree that that's the key.

No one reasonable has a problem saying that, say, the population of men and women tend to have different styles of dress and different styles of hair. Also, no one reasonable concludes that these styles inherently demonstrate a deep genetic difference between the sexes. However, sometimes people assume that a more subtle behavioral difference is an inherent genetic difference, which makes it controversial.

As for the writing styles thing, I haven't paid much attention to it myself -- though I find it hilarious that they found that out of 595 messages posted to alt.feminism and soc.women, 480 were from men and only 71 from women (!). I did read more of women's blogs when I was writing a fictional blog for my Buffy RPG character, Dot Comisky. If you want to write like someone of the opposite gender, it's probably better to look for more specific models of what you want to write like, as opposed to looking at studies of statistical averages.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]jimboboz
2007-03-22 12:52 am UTC (link)
Yes, I thought that was hilarious, too, and also sad, about the alt-feminism and soc.women groups. That's actually what leapt to mind when I saw you describe the new Iris Network, I thought - "will it become dominated by men?" In this respect, I think back to when SJGames started up a "women gamers" subforum - it got invaded and dominated by male posters whinging about there even being such a subforum, and then it got closed down without explanation, and the (female) moderator disappeared from those forums entirely. I assume they simply closed it as a failure - in that many more men than women were posting - and as "too controversial" - SJGames mods tend to close threads which get at all heated, so I don't see why they wouldn't close an entire subforum, too, if they felt it was always going to be heated.

I certainly hope it'll be different when the entire forum is devoted to this topic.

You're absolutely right that to guide your own writing it's better to look at the blogs and writing of individual women than it is to look at studies. But I wanted to make a general post about these things to hear what you all had to say, and I didn't want to pick out and point out individual bloggers for that. Also, you know how these internet discussions can go, if you talk about individual pieces of writing it just leads to endless nitpicking of irrelevant side points. But if you begin more generally...

I also thought it'd be useful to see if people who'd studied it methodically had found certain differences, and if there were any, I could note them, and then go reading male and female writers' stuff through that lens, and see how that went.

With that approach, I've certainly noted that my own writing is distinctly "male". The pdf download talks about how male writing tends to be, "the aim of this essay is," while female writing tends to, "my aim in writing this is," the male is abstracted, the female personal. Going over to the Cheetoism wiki, what did I find? "The aim of this is..." Hmmm. I changed that! It felt like my fly was open.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]brand_of_amber
2007-03-21 10:51 pm UTC (link)
Cool links. I read with enthusiasm.

Also, I love your Geo Visitors Map thing.

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…