Introduction
Boys and girls are nurtured and socialized based on their gender since childhood to fit in distinctive cultures. Consequently, they communicate in a manner aligned to the norms and rules of their sexuality (Adler & Marquardt Elmhorst, 2018). The gendered-interaction pattern lasts throughout our lifetime, and its interpretation between women and men differs. Culturally diversified gender speaking has the potential of occasioning miscommunication amongst individuals with shared speech. All the same, the disparities are viewed in the elementary intent of the communication.
Differences in Gender Language
Men often convey status gestures through sequential overriding actions such as antipathy expressions, resentment, and shaking the head from side to side. Males are also characterized as being daring and getting seated with their legs either widely crossed or spread (Ballesteros-Leiva et al., 2016). They also spread out their items on the table and stretch out their arms behind the chairs during meetings and conferences.
Contrarily, women send body language with more kindness cues and regularly position their upper body and heads to face either the addresser of the participants. They articulate merely all the universal listening gestures such as smiling, orienting their heads, leaning forward, maintaining eye contact, nodding, and synchronization of their motion with others (Adler & Marquardt Elmhorst, 2018). Interestingly, listening in men occurs with minimal nonverbal reaction and eye contact. The traits make the females accuse their male managers of not valuing their contributions.
In business environments, men have a higher capacity to keep their sensations in check and maintain a confident face. The masculine gender uses around three voices, and their deeper tones make them sound more composed, thus, the tendency of being monotone occurs (Adler & Marquardt Elmhorst, 2018). Conversely, women tend to be more emotionally sensitive and exhibit less aptness in regulating their feelings.
Women are more ardent about emotions because they employ about five intonations when talking, which necessitates raising their voices when faced with stress (Komar, 2016). Females also excel in reading body language and words, hence they are better at assessing feedback. Consequently, they can gauge accordingly whether they are being acknowledged or not. However, the superiority of accessing nonverbal cues gets frustrated by men through their ability to conceal their facial impressions.
When making decisions, women have a habit of processing contemplating options aloud. A woman’s nod towards another person shows her approval, attentiveness, or affirmation to continue with the speech. The females also display a good-learner mindset and believe that their optimistic results and hard work would be noticed and eventually promoted by their bosses (Komar, 2016). In contrast, men trust in their efforts and endorsements for their progression. Men ponder within themselves, often talk only after adducing a solution, and their nod signals agreement with the participants.
Men experience anxiety when handling emotions, which obliges them to seek solutions and often make unmediated claims. Women tend to have a preference for indirect blames and avoiding conflict as they seem to readily recognize that sometimes listening to people is important (Ballesteros-Leiva et al., 2016). The assertion is witnessed when most women who do not know each other meet. They tend to socialize more freely, unlike men in similar situations who maintain distance between themselves.
Benefits and Problems of Feminine and Masculine Language Differences
When deliberating on the effects of gender on communication, it is essential to note that there is no perfect human collaboration. Despite the default style of communication of a person being an asset to him or her, it is essential to note when it becomes a limiting aspect to others. The differences in the gender languages assist the corporate world to keep a check on the communication weaknesses and strengths for team-building, which is necessary for business growth and sustainability (Zampetakis et al., 2016).
Understanding the disparities also enables the parties to enlarge their reserve of communication prowess for effective utilization of strategies when faced with diverse circumstances. Finally, the gaps in masculine and feminine language help in nurturing effective male and female communicators, who are caring and confident due to their great mastery in balancing empathy and power gestures.
Notwithstanding the above incongruity instances, the method of correspondence may become a weakness when utilized excessively. The collaboration appeal of women can allude to submission, while the candidness in men may be treated as impassivity (Dirik, 2020). Most females are perceived as feeble as they laugh inappropriately, apologize unnecessarily and disregard their accomplishments and ideas (Manthey, 2020). On the contrary, men appear aggressive when others infringe on their personal space. The emphasis on the status signals in their posture makes them look callous and overconfident.
Conclusion
Incorporate workplaces, communication style is incessantly assessed for qualities such as likeability, empathy, caring, credibility, power, and status, which exhibit warmth and authority in a person. Nonetheless, no mode of communication has been established to be the most suitable for all business relations. However, females often have the upper hand in collaborative settings where empathy and body language are more desirable. Conversely, males are highly preferred in situations demanding firmness in decision-making, as they are considered more effective in taking charge. In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen are perceived to be much suited to dialogue and monologue, respectively.
References
Adler, R., & Marquardt Elmhorst, J. (2018). Communicating at Work (12th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Ballesteros-Leiva, F., Poilpot-Rocaboy, G., & St-Onge, S. (2016). Relationships between life-domain interactions and well-being: A comparison between men and women. @GRH, 19(2), 65. Web.
Dirik, D. (2020). Leader power bases and perceived leader effectiveness: conservation of gender stereotypes. Current Psychology. Web.
Komar, Z. (2016). Feminine Rhetoric: Feminine and masculine dimensions in the context of rhetoric, gender and social spheres. Opus Et Education, 3(2). Web.
Manthey, M. (2020). Collective communication versus small group communication – Gender differences in performance improvement under uncertainty. SSRN Electronic Journal. Web.
Zampetakis, L., Bakatsaki, M., Kafetsios, K., & Moustakis, V. (2016). Sex differences in entrepreneurs’ business growth intentions: An identity approach. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 5(1). Web.