MorenzB FinalEssay

Brooke Morenz English 1102 Professor Brian South 12/10/18 Gender Communications Research Paper: Women and Aggression Girls, ultimately, navigate relationships and and show aggression differently than boys do. This can be directly attributed to the socialization of women, and it ultimately worsens women’s relationships with each other leading to more bullying, and more harmful and lasting impacts on those relationships. Although physical violence between men is obviously something we do not want in society, this research proposal will explore the hidden and not conversed about dangers of girl and women aggression. Then, how that evolves into their future relationships, and the way they deal with conflict in their friend groups. My research findings were that ultimately, women show aggression through ways both verbal and non-verbal that can be far more devastating for people than physical damage. To examine this topic, We will break it up into 3 sections, the basic differences between men and women in their interpersonal relationships and emotional processing, then further exploration into the way women show aggression and bully each other, and turn the tables to examine what this all means when it comes to preventing bullying when women are bystanders now. To examine the first facet of this concept, we have to ask the question “do women and men have interpersonal differences?” The answer is yes. When examining this topic, we need to start by acknowledging sex and gender stereotypes, and recognizing the good and the bad within them. In his book “Sex and Gender Differences in Personal Relationships”, Daniel J. Canary argues that when we as humans attempt to recognize and explain differences in male and female behavior “Stereotypes can offer a means to explain sex and gender differences on at least two levels: (1) as a way to predict men’s and women’s behavioral differences; and (2) as a way that people establish baselines for expectations about other people’s behavior.” (3). He goes onto explain that there are basic stereotypes among men and women that we utilize: “the stereotypical man is instrumental, assertive, competitive, dynamic, and task-competent, whereas the stereotypical woman is kind, nurturing, sensitive, relationally oriented, and expressive”. (3) Although these stereotypes can help us navigate what men and women are supposed to act like, and what they do act like, they are very harmful when it comes to the men and who deviate, which they often do. If we put men and women in a box of expectations societally, that completely restricts our full understanding of them and their behavior, especially when most of those men and women are not their stereotypes. The best way to examine this concept is to dismantle these stereotypes and really look into what men and women are actually like through observation and study of their interaction behavior. We then also need to define the difference between sex and gender. Sex is defined as “either of the two main categories (male and female) into which humans and most other living things are divided on the basis of their reproductive functions”. Canary states in his book that Gender is “partially composed of one’s biological sex” (5) but that gender is also “the psychological, social, and cultural features and characteristics strongly associated with the biological categories of male and female” (Gilbert, 1993, p.11)”(5). To examine this issue further, we then have to acknowledge from this research that sex and gender are two different things. We also have to understand from the above research from Canary earlier on, is that stereotypes are simply understandings, and are possibly false ones, and that gender qualities are much more fluid and different than we thought. Stereotypes can be helpful baselines but we ultimately have to expand our thinking on what both genders are actually like, and therefore understand how they process emotions and plainly, the difference of how they interact with each other in normal situations with their different levels of emotional expression. First, we have to look into emotional expression. Steven McCormack, in his book “Reflect and Relate: an introduction to interpersonal communication” (2016) states that generally “Across cultures, women report experiencing more sadness, fear, guilt and shame, than men, while men report feeling more anger and other hostile emotions (Fischer, Rodriguez Mosquera, van Vianen, & Manstead, 2004) and that “In western cultures, gender differences in emotion derive in part from differences in how men and women orient to interpersonal relationships (Brody and Hall, 2004).” He goes onto say that “Women are more likely than men to express emotions that support relationships and suppress emotions that assert their own interests over another’s (Zahn-Waxler, 2001).” He then states that as a consequence, women are more likely to feel sadness more often than anger because it isn’t directed towards another person and then does not affect relationships. Men, because they are not relationally oriented like women are, allow themselves to feel this anger. To them, anger as an internal emotion, even before expressing it aloud, is allowable because they aren’t internally hurting someone’s feelings. Also, sadness in itself implies internal reflection as a person and emotional vulnerability. Frankly, they tend to turn to anger because anger, as an emotion, asserts their evolutionary dominant masculinity. This implies that Men are not relationally oriented like women are, so when it comes to expressing less vulnerable emotions, such as anger, they can do so more freely because they are not worried about what will happen to the relationship. Now that we have examined the emotions both men and women tend to feel, we will extrapolate on how women, specifically, actually express them. Second, we have to examine what adult women and young women are like when it comes to aggression, why, and how that specifically manifests itself in aggression verbally and non-verbally through bullying and plainly expression in general. Typically, and as much research suggests and as I mentioned before, aggression for men manifests itself through physicality and physical violence. Due to society’s emphasis on masculine qualities of steely emotions and strength, it’s only natural that men would assert their problems through their bodies, as they are taught to be physically strong and not acknowledge their emotions, because that’s “girly”. Research suggests that women portray their aggression differently. Going back to the stereotype that women are “emotional and nurturing”, this seems to be society’s understanding that this is what characterizes women’s interactions with each other. Which, both unfortunately and fortunately, has shown itself to be true. Author and Psychologist Michael Gurian talks about this concept in his book “The Wonder of Girls” (2002). He explores this concept and then gives it a name: the “Intimacy Imperative”. He then states “As one applies nature based research on the female brain to girls’ very complex journey through life, “empowerment” is only a part of the puzzle; but it is also developing along a course set by an intimacy imperative. This need is certainly as important to them as social power.” (53) He goes on to talk about Harvard feminist Carol Gilligan and how her definitions agree with that concept: “based her theories on the fact that females and males were psychologically different - females by nature more relational, males more independence oriented - and that modern psychology neglected that difference to its peril.” (53) Through that, we can agree that women express most of their emotions socially, and through connections with each other, something men are not taught. Research shows that their socialization is geared more towards dominance, protection and physicality. As this is unlike men, psychologists, sociologists, and communication scholars alike began to apply this very same concept to how boys and girls manage conflict and show aggression, having all of them start revolutionizing this term for women: Social Aggression. First, we need to define Aggression. Merriam Webster defines this as “hostile or violent behavior or attitudes toward another; readiness to attack or confront.” We tend to use this word to show socially expressed anger for both genders. Expanding further on this definition, we can say also that hostile or violent behavior can be expressed in multiple ways, both verbally and non-verbally. It is also important to note that aggression is not an emotion. Aggression is a display of that emotion, anger, and varies in intensity, and as I’ve mentioned, as well as form. Next, we need to define Social Aggression. In her book “Social Aggression Among Girls”, Marion K. Underwood defines Social Aggression as “Behavior directed toward harming another’s friendships, social status, or self esteem, and may take direct forms such as social rejection and negative facial expressions or body movements, or indirect forms such as slanderous rumors, friendship manipulation or social exclusion (Galen & Underwood 1997)” (5) Now that we have defined Aggression and Social Aggression, we can now break that down into different facets of aggression within women and how they manifest themselves differently. “Odd Girl Out: The hidden culture of aggression in girls” author Rachel Simmons describes these as Alternative Aggressions. She describes alternative aggressions as being displays of emotion, specifically anger, that are more prevalent in women, specifically because society has socialized women to not show their anger like men do. Her research, and others research shows that these alternative aggressions ultimately are prevalent because the impulsive, evolutionary reactionary expression of anger, which is physical violence, is not accepted for women because it threatens their society framed view of femininity. So, they turn to ways that are more socially acceptable for anger, although it possibly harms their relationships more. The first one she talks about is Relational Aggression. She defines this is “acts that “harm others through damage (or the threat of damage) to relationships or feelings of acceptance, friendship, or group inclusion.” (21). Going along with the intimacy imperative concept, this completely applies here. Girls are ultimately using their desire for intimacy and power over relationships as a manipulative tool here. It’s because they are angry and cannot show it physically, or at least have it be socially acceptable if they do, that they use what they naturally value (relationships) as a way to show dominance. And not in the very forward, masculine characteristic of dominance. Simmons goes on to say “In these acts, the aggressor uses her relationship with the target as a weapon”. (21) With that, it really is a form of dominance that inherently hurts more, ultimately because they are using the vulnerability and emotions of others as a weapon to give them advantage, and a way to show that person that they are really angry at them. So what better way to do that than to tear them down socially while building yourself up. The next facet of Female Aggression that she describes is Indirect Aggression, and says “Indirect Aggression allows the Aggression to avoid confronting her target. It is covert behavior in which the aggressor makes it seem as though there had been no intent to hurt at all...such as by spreading a rumor”. (21). This is a way that still satisfies our need for dominance and aggression while retaining our feminine image, making it possibly a more dangerous form of aggression. This is because ultimately, you’re not only going through this aggression expression process unscathed, you are actually positively adding to your personal character and credibility. This makes it quite easily accessible for women to turn to this form aggression, even though it greatly damages the ones they show it to, possibly permanently damaging their reputation. She also defines Social Aggression as the last facet: “Social Aggression is intended to damage self esteem or social status within a group”. (21). As I stated before, these aggression tactics are ones that are far more harmful because they ultimately do not damage the woman aggressor, these give them a chance to maintain their pristine innocence that society wants them to have. Now that we have explored the dangers of female alternative agressions, I will turn to a more positive aspect of this issue, and how these same ideas apply to how women observe bullying, and how their role as bystanders can be a possible solution or hinderance to the problem of female aggression within bullying. In the journal article “Bystanding or Standing By: Gender Issues in Coping With Bullying in English Schools” by Helen Cowie, she talks further about the types of people involved in bullying, the social roles of that and how that applies to gender. She states “The most common types of participants are “assistants,” who physically help the bully; “reinforcers,” who incite the bully; “outsiders,” who remain inactive and pretend not to see what is happening; and “defenders,” who provide help for the victim and confront the bully.” (86). She applies this later to gender and states “Girls are more inclined to recommend “socialized tactics” than are boys when asked about ways of resolving peer conflicts [Hay et al., 1992]. Similarly, Österman et al. [1997] found that girls were estimated by peers to use constructive conflict resolution and third-party interventions more often than boys. They concluded that girls appear to have a greater capacity than boys to analyze and interpret social situations when intervening to smooth over interpersonal difficulties in peer relationships.” (95). We can make a lot of implications about these findings, and they are very interesting. A large one we can conclude is that while women tend to start fights and show agression with their words, they also have the capacity to end fights with their words. Like I explained in the previous paragraphs, because of their ability to manipulate language to their own benefit, they can use the same tactic to mediate arguments. This “intimacy imperative” that Michael Gurian stated in his book, ultimately gives them a distinct advantage when it comes to reducing anxiety and arguments within interpersonal relationships. Therefore, we can imply that when situations caused by women showing aggression get out of control, women can also be the ones to fix them. Not just because of their words, but because of their unique and valuable trait of valuing people intrinsically, and their relationships with them, but also relationships between their friends. Women can tear each other down but can truly be a valuable asset to making the most out of relationships, as well as life. So, we have analyzed the basic differences between men and women in their interpersonal relationships and emotional processing, explored the way women show aggression and bully each other, and finally turned the tables to examine what this all means when it comes to preventing bullying when women are bystanders. As a topic, this was extremely interesting to research. As a woman with a strong, dominant personality myself, it was fascinating and introspective to look at my research findings through the lens of my own personal life. This research essay actually really helped me a lot, because I would like to further study Gender Communication in graduate school (for Communication Studies). Though, in this essay, I explained some devastating female aggression tactics, we can finally conclude that women are fierce, intelligent, and unstoppable forces of human beings, whose emotions and expressions, definitely cannot fit into a stereotypical box. Works Cited Cowie, Helen. “Bystanding or Standing by: Gender Issues in Coping with Bullying in English Schools.” Aggressive Behavior, vol. 26, no. 1, 2000, p. 85. Simmons, Rachel. Odd Girl Out: the Hidden Culture of Aggression in Girls. Piatkus, 2012. Gurian, Michael. The Wonder of Girls: Understanding the Hidden Nature of Our Daughters. Vision Australia Information and Library Service, 2005. Canary, Daniel J., and Tara M. Emmers-Sommer. Sex and Gender Differences in Personal Relationships. Guilford Press, 1998. Underwood, Marion K. Social Aggression Among Girls. Guilford Press, 2003.