The Biggest Mistake Men Make When Communicating With Women

The Biggest Mistake Men Make When Communicating With Women

男性与女性沟通时最大的错误

I never get writer’s block, and for a good reason: Writing articles for an online community is a feedback loop. I write an article. I get comments on that article. The comments spark a new idea. I write that article. I get more comments. I get more ideas. Lather, rinse, repeat. Since my first piece here, I noticed a pattern: the colossal difference between the kinds of comments women leave, and the kinds of comments men leave. (Not always, not without outliers, but overwhelmingly so.) Women usually leave what I call “Yes, and…” comments. These comments align with my point and expand on it, referencing their own similar experiences or research. I’m sure they don’t agree with every single word, but they agree overall, so that’s the sentiment they express. Men usually leave what I call “Okay, but…” comments.

我从不会遇到写作瓶颈，而且理由很充分：为网络社区撰写文章是一个反馈循环。我写一篇文章，收到读者评论，评论激发新想法，我再写一篇文章，收到更多评论，获得更多灵感，循环往复。自从在这里发表第一篇文章起，我就注意到一个规律：女性留下的评论和男性留下的评论有着天壤之别（并非绝对，也有例外，但绝大多数情况如此）。女性通常会留下我称之为“对，而且……”的评论，这类评论认同我的观点并在此基础上延伸，结合她们自身的相似经历或相关研究。我确信她们不会认同每一个字，但整体赞同，所以表达的就是这种态度。男性通常会留下我称之为“好吧，但是……”的评论。

These comments may initially agree or disagree, but they always object and correct. They simply must point out something – a concept, a sentiment, an experience, a word – I could have expressed better. Then they tell me why I’m wrong. It’s called ritual opposition, and boys learn it young. Deborah Tannen (New York Times bestselling author and professor of linguistics at Georgetown University) spent her career studying the sociolinguistic patterns of men and women. These habits begin in childhood and are conditioned differently depending on your gender. Generally, girls and women are rewarded for fitting in, while boys and men are praised for standing out. Even the pronouns we use reflect this (women favor “we”; men favor “I”).

这类评论起初可能认同或反对，但总会提出异议并纠正。他们一定要指出某个概念、情感、经历或用词，说我本可以表达得更好，然后告诉我为什么我错了。这被称作“仪式性反对”，而男孩们从小就学会了这一点。黛博拉·坦嫩（《纽约时报》畅销书作家、乔治城大学语言学教授）毕生研究男女的社会语言模式，这些习惯始于童年，因性别不同而受不同规训。通常，女孩和女性会因融入群体而获认可，男孩和男性则会因脱颖而出而受赞赏。就连我们使用的代词都反映这种差异（女性常用“我们”，男性常用“我”）。

In her article, “The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why,” Tannen wrote: “[Our culture] will ostracize a girl who calls attention to her own superiority and criticize her by saying, ‘She thinks she’s something’; and a girl who tells others what to do is called ‘bossy.’ Thus girls learn to talk in ways that balance their own needs with those of others — to save face for one another in the broadest sense of the term. Boys tend to play very differently. They usually play in larger groups in which more boys can be included, but not everyone is treated as an equal. Boys with high status in their group are expected to emphasize rather than downplay their status, and usually one or several boys will be seen as the leader.” As a result, women learn to view communication as egalitarian. They build bonds and resolve conflicts by supporting, complimenting, and apologizing to each other. Men, on the other hand, learn to view communication as a hierarchy. They assert dominance by challenging one another, vying for that valuable spot as “the leader.”

坦嫩在她的文章《谈话的力量：谁能被倾听及其原因》中写道：“（我们的文化）会排挤那些刻意彰显自身优越感的女孩，并指责说‘她觉得自己有多了不起’；对别人发号施令的女孩则会被称作‘专横跋扈’。因此，女孩们学会用兼顾自身与他人需求的方式说话——从广义上讲，就是为彼此保全颜面。男孩的玩耍方式截然不同。他们通常在更大的群体里玩耍，可以容纳更多人，但并非人人都被平等对待。群体中地位高的男孩往往会凸显而非淡化自己的地位，通常还会有一个或几个男孩被视作领头人。”如此一来，女性逐渐将沟通视为平等互动，通过相互支持、赞美与道歉来建立联结、化解矛盾；而男性则将沟通看作一场等级博弈，通过互相挑战、争夺“领导者”位置来彰显主导权。

In other words, women use language to collaborate, while men use language to compete. And one of men’s most persistent competitive habits, according to Tannen? Ritual opposition. Ritual opposition is a verbal sparring match in which you play devil’s advocate, trying to “poke holes and find weaknesses” in someone else’s argument. It supposedly serves as a way to test ideas and establish a hierarchy among men. It may benefit you on a kickball field with your buddies, or in the boardroom at a tech-bro startup, but guess what? Ritual opposition isn’t effective with women. In fact, it’s counterproductive. While Tannen first coined the phrase in the ’90s, a lot has changed since then.

换言之，女性用语言协作，男性用语言竞争。据坦嫩所言，男性最根深蒂固的竞争习惯之一就是“仪式性反对”。仪式性反对是一种言语交锋，你刻意站在对立立场，试图在别人的观点中“挑刺、找漏洞”，这被视为检验观点、在男性间确立等级地位的方式。这种做法或许在和朋友踢球时管用，或是在科技初创公司的会议室里行得通，但你猜怎么着？仪式性反对对女性并不奏效，事实上只会适得其反。尽管坦嫩早在90年代就创造了这个说法，但从那以后很多事情都已改变。

Now, when ritual opposition is directed towards women, we call it “manterupting” and “mansplaining” – and since many men subconsciously view women as below them on the hierarchical ladder, they do it more. When speaking to women, opposition becomes their default setting. In work environments, men interrupt women 33% more often than other men. Instead of attempting to understand our overall point, they’re auditing each word, ready to pounce on any inconsistency or semantic slip-up. In online environments, opposition devolves into aggression. “Many women do not like it,” Tannen wrote in her book, Talking from 9 to 5 (affiliate link). “Missing the ritual nature of verbal opposition, they are likely to take such challenges as personal attacks. Worse, they find it impossible to do their best in a contentious environment.” Personally, I find it fucking annoying.

如今，当这种仪式性反对针对女性时，我们称之为“男性打断”和“男性说教”——而由于许多男性在潜意识里将女性视为等级阶梯中低于自己的人，他们会更频繁地这么做。在和女性交谈时，提出反对成了他们的默认模式。在工作场合，男性打断女性的频率比打断其他男性高出33%。他们不去理解核心观点，反而逐字逐句审视，随时准备抓住任何矛盾或措辞失误发起攻击。在网络环境中，这种反对会演变成攻击性言论。“很多女性并不喜欢这样，”坦嫩在《职场对话法则》一书中写道，“她们体会不到言语反对中的仪式性，往往会把这类挑战当作人身攻击。更糟的是，她们发现在充满争执的环境里根本无法发挥最佳状态。”就我个人而言，这真的烦透了。

I’m reminded of a petulant child. You tell a kid it’s 6:00, it’s time to go, and they need to put their shoes on, and they say, “It’s not 6:00. It’s 5:57.” Okay, but you know what I mean, I know what I mean, and the point still stands; we need to go, so put your shoes on. Working with a guy like this is one thing. At least you can enjoy your nights and weekends without hearing the words, “Well, ackshually…” But dating a contrarian is an absolute nightmare. Exhibit A: This manchild from Season 1 of Showtime’s documentary series, Couples Therapy. Somewhere along the line, this guy’s little countering habit developed into an oppositional conversational style. Always the contrarian, he constantly needs to correct, devalue, dispute, and argue with every little detail, totally missing the forest for the trees. (For the record, they’re divorced now.)

这让我想起一个任性的小孩。你跟孩子说现在六点了该走了，让他把鞋穿上，他就会说：“现在不是六点，是五点五十七分。”行吧，但你懂我的意思，我也清楚自己在说什么，重点根本没变——我们得走了，赶紧把鞋穿上。和这种男人共事是一回事，至少晚上和周末还能清净，不用听他开口就是“呃，其实吧……”。但和一个爱抬杠的人谈恋爱，简直是噩梦。案例一：Showtime纪录片《伴侣治疗》第一季里那个巨婴男。不知从什么时候起，这家伙小小的抬杠习惯演变成了一种对抗式说话方式，永远在唱反调，事事都要纠正、贬低、质疑、争论，完全捡了芝麻丢了西瓜（顺带一提，他们现在已经离婚了）。

When I was single, I met a shockingly large number of men like this. As soon as they started interrupting, countering, and nitpicking, I was gone. Date over. Relationship doomed. I cannot build a deep, vulnerable bond with someone who’s always looking to say, “Gotcha!” Because women use language to collaborate, we typically view communication as the glue that holds a relationship together. An oppositional partner is acid, eroding that glue with every conversation — especially when it comes to resolving conflicts. After researching married couples for decades, relationship expert Dr. John Gottman discovered something he called the magic ratio. In one experiment, Dr. Gottman asked couples to spend 15 minutes attempting to resolve a conflict. He recorded their communication tactics and reviewed the tapes. Nine years later, he was able to accurately predict which couples had stayed together, and which couples had gotten divorced.

我单身的时候，遇到过多得惊人的这类男人。只要他们一开始打断、反驳、吹毛求疵，我就会立刻抽身。约会到此结束，关系注定没戏。我根本无法和一个总想着抓我把柄、说“抓到你了”的人建立深刻又坦诚的联结。因为女性习惯用语言协作，我们通常把沟通看作维系感情的黏合剂。而一个总爱抬杠的伴侣就像强酸，每一次对话都在腐蚀这份黏合剂——尤其是在解决矛盾的时候。情感专家约翰·戈特曼博士对已婚夫妇研究了数十年，发现了一个他称之为“神奇比例”的现象。在一项实验中，戈特曼博士让伴侣们用15分钟尝试解决一个矛盾，他记录下他们的沟通方式并反复回看录像。九年后，他准确预测出了哪些伴侣还在一起，哪些已经离婚。

Successful couples had one thing in common: For every one negative interaction they experienced during a conflict, they had five or more positive interactions. One negative: five positive — the magic ratio. FYI: Negative interactions include interrupting, invalidating, and being overly critical of your partner. So what constitutes a positive interaction, according to Dr. Gottman? Apologizing for hurting your partner, no ifs, ands, or buts. Being interested in what they have to say. Expressing affection, physically or verbally. Intentionally appreciating them. Accepting and validating your partner’s perspective. Finding opportunities for agreement, not disagreement. Say whatever you want to your boys, but in relationships, ritual opposition is toxic. It creates a barrier to honest, vulnerable communication.

幸福的伴侣们都有一个共同点：在一次冲突中，每出现一次负面互动，就伴随五次及以上的正面互动。一次负面，五次正面——这就是神奇比例。顺带一提：负面互动包括打断伴侣、否定对方、以及过度挑剔。那么在戈特曼博士看来，什么才算正面互动？伤害了对方就直接道歉，没有任何借口；认真倾听对方想说的话；用肢体或语言表达爱意；刻意去欣赏对方；接纳并认可对方的观点；主动寻找共识，而不是分歧。你跟兄弟怎么抬杠都行，但在亲密关系里，仪式性反对是有害的，它会筑起一道墙，阻碍真诚、敞开心扉的沟通。

When you’re constantly challenging your partner’s feelings, experiences, and perspective, every interaction feels negative. You’re six for six. A healthy relationship simply cannot thrive under those conditions. Stop trying to be right, and start trying to understand where your partner is coming from. Otherwise, you may be the biggest man in the boardroom, but you’ll be eating dinner alone.