"The whole goddamn business of what you're calling intimacy bugs the hell out of me. I never know what you women mean when you talk about it. Karen complains that I don't talk to her, but it's not talk she wants, it's some other damn thing, only I don't know what the hell it is!" This quote from a man interviewed by Lillian Rubin is the perfect example of the differences in communication between men and women. These differences in communication methods of women and men are born of a complex interaction between society and the individual. Men seem to struggle with intimacy and emotional expression, while women rely on this type of communication causing much struggle between the sexes.
Lillian Rubin suggests that intimacy, a form of communication between men and women, itself is an ambiguous or difficult term to define, but asserts that it does embody the idea of the ability to put away a public persona and be cared about or care for the "real person". This alludes to a struggle between the human need for intimacy and that for independence suggested by other sociologists. In addition to this idea of intimacy, Rubin looks deeper into the human psyche and analyzes the different ways in which men and women communicate their emotions. Rubin explains that while women can easily explain what emotions they are feeling and what has caused these, men struggle to verbalize their feelings and this causes animosities between men and women. Women want men to communicate their emotions while men don't understand why they should or how to go about doing this (Rubin, p. 384-386).
Rubin's explanation for the differences in communication is that it stems from societal pressures that encourage men to suppress their emotions, and act "rationally". Men are socialized to believe that acting emotionally like women is not normal. She states that "this is the single most dispiriting dilemma between women and men." Finally Rubin goes on to suggest that while men can act...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document