男性与女性沟通时常犯的最大错误The Biggest Mistake Men Make When Communicating With Women

Gender Differences in Communication Styles

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.
我写作从不卡壳，原因很简单：为在线社区撰稿是一个“反馈环”。我写一篇文章，收到评论；评论激发出新灵感，我再写下一篇：搓揉，冲洗，再来一遍。这套流程我可谓轻车熟路。

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.)
自从在这里发表第一篇作品起，我就注意到一个规律：女性留下的评论和男性留下的评论之间，存在着巨大的差异（虽非绝对，但绝大多数情况如此）。

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.
女性朋友留下的通常是我口中的“是的，而且……”式评论。这类评论会认同我的观点并在此基础上进行扩展，分享她们类似的经历或心得。我确信她们不见得认同我说的每一个字，但整体上是共情的，并把这种情绪表达了出来。

Men usually leave what I call “Okay, but…” comments. 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.
而男同胞留下的通常是“好吧，但是……”式评论。这些评论开头可能表示赞同，也可能不赞同，但重点永远在于“反对”和“纠错”。他们必须指出点什么：一个概念、一种情绪、一段经历，或者某个词，他们觉得我本来可以表达得更好。然后，他们开始论证我哪里错了。

Sure enough, I did a little digging, and it’s a proven phenomenon. It’s called ritual opposition, and boys learn it young.
果然，我深挖了一下，发现这其实是一个有据可查的现象。这叫“对抗式沟通”，男孩们从小就学会了这一套。

Deborah Tannen, 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.
乔治城大学语言学教授丹南（Deborah Tannen）职业生涯都在研究男女的社会语言学模式。据她介绍，这些沟通习惯在童年扎根。在成长过程中，社会按照“男女有别”的模子，将我们塑造成了截然不同的样子。

Typically, girls and women are rewarded for blending in. Boys and men are rewarded for standing out. Right down to the pronouns we use (women often use “we,” men often use “I”), our language reflects these dynamics.
通常情况下，女性因为“合群”获得嘉奖，而男性则因为“出众”获得肯定。大到整体沟通风格，小到代词的使用（女性常说“我们”，男性常说“我”），我们的用语往往体现出这些微妙的差异。

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.”
丹南在她的文章《谈话的力量：谁的声音被听见了，为什么？》中写道：“（我们的文化）会排挤那些爱显摆优越感的女孩，批评她们‘觉得自己了不起’；而教别人做事的女孩则会被贴上‘太强势’的标签。因此，女孩们学会了在表达自己需求的同时，也兼顾他人的感受：在人际交往中尽可能保全每个人的体面。”

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.”
“男孩的玩法则截然不同。他们通常是成群结队地玩，‘入群’门槛虽低，内部却高低有别。地位高的男孩非但不能低调，反而得处处彰显自己的威望，群体中总会自然而然地冒出几个‘领头羊’。”

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.”
“结果就是：女性渐渐习惯将沟通视为平等对话。她们通过相互支持、赞美、甚至道歉，来建立情感纽带并化解冲突。相比之下，男性则学会了将沟通看作等级阶梯。他们通过彼此挑战来彰显地位，以此角逐那个令人垂涎的‘领头羊’宝座。”

In other words, women use language to collaborate, while men use language to compete.
换句话说，女性用语言来合作，而男性用语言来竞争。

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.
而丹南认为，男性最根深蒂固的竞争习惯之一就是对抗式沟通。所谓“对抗式沟通”，就是一场言语上的“拆台赛”。你扮演“杠精”，试图在别人的论点中“挑刺”。这本来是男人之间切磋观点、并借此分出高下的一种方式。

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.
在球场上跟哥们儿较劲，或者在“科技男”公司的董事会上，这套可能挺管用。但你猜怎么着？“对抗式沟通”在女性世界完全行不通，甚至会适得其反。

When ritual opposition is directed towards women, we call it “manterrupting” 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.
当男士们用这套方式和女性交流时，我们称之为“男性打断”和“男性说教”。由于许多男人下意识里仍将女性排在等级阶梯的下方，他们会做得更出格。在与女性交流时，“反对”成了他们的默认设置。

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.
在工作环境中，男人打断女性的频率比打断男性高出33%。他们不是在试图理解我们的核心观点，而是在审核每一个词，紧盯着任何言语破绽，随时准备反咬一口。

Dating a contrarian is an absolute nightmare
和“杠精”约会，简直是噩梦

Working with a guy like this is one thing. At least you can enjoy your nights and weekends without hearing the words, “Well, actually…” But in a relationship, this habit of ritual opposition is toxic.
在职场遇到这种人也就罢了，至少周末你还能清净清净，不用听到那句令人窒息的“呃，其实吧……”（Well, actually…）。但对夫妻或恋人而言，这种对抗式沟通的习惯是和谐关系的克星。

I’ve seen this “manchild” behavior too often: men who constantly need to correct, devalue, and dispute every little detail—like the kid arguing it’s 5:57 instead of 6:00. They totally miss the forest for the trees. I cannot build a deep bond with someone who’s always looking to say, “Gotcha!”
我看过太多这种“巨婴”行为：他们执着于纠正、贬低和争论每一个细节，就像那个非要争论是5点57分还是6点的孩子。他们完全是“只见树木，不见森林”。我无法与一个总想玩“抓到你错处了！”游戏的人建立深层的联结。

Because women use language to collaborate, we view communication as the glue that holds a relationship together. An oppositional partner is acid, eroding that glue with every conversation.
因为女性将语言视为协作工具，我们认为沟通是维持关系的“胶水”。而一个喜欢对抗的伴侣就像是“酸液”，在每一次对话中都在腐蚀这层胶水。

Relationship expert Dr. John Gottman discovered a “magic ratio” for successful couples: For every one negative interaction (interrupting, invalidating, nitpicking), there must be five or more positive interactions (validating, appreciating, finding agreement).
关系专家约翰·戈特曼博士发现，成功夫妇之间存在一个“神奇比例”：每出现1次负面互动（打断、否定、挑刺），必须有至少5次正面互动（认可、赞赏、寻求共识）来抵消。

When you bring “ritual opposition” home, every interaction feels negative. You might be “right” about the facts, but you are losing the magic ratio. A healthy relationship simply cannot thrive when you are six for six on negativity.
当你把“对抗式沟通”带回家时，每一次互动都变成了负面体验。也许你在事实层面是“对”的，却离神奇比例越来越远。当你的每一句话都在挑刺时，健康的关系根本无法生存。

Conclusion: Stop trying to be right
结语：别再执着于“我是对的”

Ritual opposition creates a barrier to honest, vulnerable communication. It may help you establish a hierarchy in the boardroom, but it creates a desert in the bedroom. 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.
“对抗式沟通”阻碍了坦诚、不设防的深度交流。它或许能帮你赢得董事会里的座次，却会让你的情感生活变成一片荒漠。别再执着于“我对你错”，试着去理解你的伴侣。否则，你也许能当上董事会里最威风的男人，但你最终只能孤零零地一个人吃晚饭。