Gefen & Ridings - (extra blog) Blog #18

The thing that stood out to me in this article the most was the fact that the gender-differences in communication generally have a negative effect on the conversation, due to cross-gender miscommunication. As the authors state, the gender differences in oral discourse are the result of socialized differences, and therefore should occur within informal written communication. As I have said before, this hasn't always been my experience in online courses, but I do see this idea often throughout everyday communication in the classroom setting. Furthermore, I agree with the way the authors state the way women communicate. For me, I know that I generally state my opinions or thoughts strongly, even in online discussions in courses. But, the authors explain that women usually communicate to create rapport or affinity, so their conversation is generally less forceful. I agree with the idea that women often communicate in such a way as to make it a point to include the whole group, and men do not attempt to accomplish the same thing. Looking back on my participation in class discussion boards or in-class discussions throughout college, I do see the tendency toward "softening" my speech/communication so to not offend anyone and to include more people.

"Participation in Electronic Discourse in a 'Feminist' Field" By Herring, Johnson, & DiBenedetto Blog #17

I still am amazed by the findings in this article--that men talk more than women in public settings. It may be that I'm from a large family of primarily girls (5 girls, 3 boys), so it seems to me that women talk far more than men and generally control the conversation more. I'm understanding more now that this is not always the case in academic discussion or classes, especially cyber discussions. What I found most interesting in this article was the fact that, even though men contributed about 80% of the posts and the points, they still reported that women controlled the discussion or that they dominated. This is so outrageous to me, and is evidence of the bias against women in general. It seems that women have to work twice as hard as men to be academically competitive, to be taken seriously, and to have their thoughts valued. Also, it seems that, in this study, the men felt that they were "shut out" rather easily. It's amazing to me that the women in this particular study put up with a lot, but at the first sign of resistance, the men complained.

" ‘I totally agree with you’: gender interactions in educational online discussion groups" J. Guiller & A. Durndell Blog #16

I was somewhat shocked by the findings presented in this article. I have been in several online classes with discussion based-curriculum and I have never felt that men are more aggressive or confrontational. I do agree with the idea that women often put in more of their own feelings, thoughts, or experiences compared to men, but that seems to be pretty true of women in general. Even if this sounds rude or unkind, in my experience with online courses, men seem to try to get by with as little discussion as possible. I continue to be shocked by results of studies finding that men are more verbose or more firm in their opinions. This has been the opposite of my experience. In every online course I've ever taken, and just about any class I've taken overall, women always seem to be the ones who want to speak up more or voice their thoughts.

"Gendered Voices in Children's Television Advertising"--Fern L. Johnson and Karren Young Blog #16

This article brought a lot of things to my attention. I knew that advertising companies blatanly markets countless products to children--something I that I believe is completely ludicrous in and of itself. However, I hadn't thought about the effect of those advertisements outside of the material. I never thought about the fact that children take many of their social cues from television, and now more than ever, advertisements and the media have the power to shape children. It's no wonder that gender biases and female oppression has continued to be such a virus. Children are spoon-fed all of this nearly before they can even talk. It's very sad to think that advertising agencies have so much control over what children believe and how they learn to behave. The article mentions that advertising to children trains them for consumer culture, and that they are a daily part of life for children. It's baffling to think about how many cues children take from what they see in advertisements and on television, and what impact it has on the adults they will become.

"Gender Issues in Advertising"--Jeanne Munger Artz and Warren Pundy Blog #15

After reading this article, I realized that I haven't noticed gender bias in advertising so much when it comes to language. I haven't considered the bias that exists most likely because I am so used to hearing things that way. The article did mention the issue of "objectification"--this is something that I have noticed and that continues to bother me. To say it plainly, I really can't stand the fact that women are used purely as sexual objects and are devalued for advertising purposes. Reading this article reminded me of a specific television commercial. A few years ago, Carl's Jr. released two separate ads for some product. One had Hugh Hefner and the other had Paris Hilton with almost no clothes on. Both commercials completely objectified women in very different ways. Those ads completely soured my opinion of that company as a whole, and my father actually wrote a complaint and has altogether boycotted the restaurant chain because of them (which I am very proud of). It is a shame that, while there has been so much advocacy to change language, advertising companies and the media continue to treat women purely as objects.

"Beyond the He/Man Approach"--Wendy Martyna Blog #14

One of the things I found interesting in Martyna's article was the discussion about our ability to identify with a pronoun grouping. She explains that men have an easier time identifying with statements that use a neutral "he" pronoun, and that they are naturally identifying with the specific form of the pronoun. Conversely, women have to think quite differently to be able to identify with "he", and they are more likely to use alternatives, like "person". It's amazing to me that there is such a distinction between using "he" and "person". In my opinion, "person" is far more all-encompassing and respectful of either gender. It's not nearly as cumbersome and doesn't sound as strange as trying to include "his or her". I don't understand why using "person" or "oneself" isn't more widely accepted and used.

I'm beginning to see just how difficult introducing changes in the language would be. Furthermore, just because a formal change is made or gender-neutral terms are introduced doesn't mean that people will start using them. I imagine that many people are so conditioned to use the terms they use that a big change would be just about impossible. As an argument in the article pointed out, people use pronouns in the generic and specific form so many times throughout the day. It would be extremely difficult to be conscious enough of one's usage to make a lasting change.

"The Epicene Pronoun: The Word the Failed"--Dennis E. Baron Blog #13

In this article, it's interesting to note that several other languages have a gender-neutral pronoun for "his or her". Baron explains that in French, there are two different phrases for "his or her" and "him and her". In my opinion, "everyone", "everybody" and even "they" all imply gender neutrality, and I've never felt personally affronted by the use of one of these terms. They are less cumbersome and sound far more natural then constantly trying to say "him or her" and "he or she". One thing the article pointed out is the use of "one" as a pronoun, as in "oneself". I agree that this hasn't been the most widely used pronoun outside of formal environments or the highly educated.

Even in formal academic essays, many college students opt for the incorrect second-person pronoun "your", rather than using "one's" or "oneself". It's interesting to me that this hasn't really caught on as a gender neutral pronoun in our language as much as using "they" or "everyone".

The thing that is most sad to think about is how these gender biases came to be in our language. I really have never felt bad or offended through the use of the masculine bias in language, however, it's sad when I consider the fact that at one point, women were not considered to be any different from property. The bias came to be over the years because of the fact women were devalued and treated as less than men. So, while it may not bother people enough to be changed, the reasons behind the bias should be enough of an issue to spark change in our language.