Response to Can't we talk?

The author presented several differences in the way men and women converse. She had also used examples to illustrate her stand on how the communicating differences had resulted in conflicts between the two genders.

The author had presented a view that women generally let their heart rule over their mind and men, vice versa. The examples she had given were apt and common. I particularly agree on one of her views that women converse and/or complain to gain empathy and support, however, men converse when they need to gain the upper hand. Not just conversing, men generally feel good when they gain the upperhand. It is believed that men generally have a larger/ more fragile ego as compared to women. They generally do not want people to see their weaker side and often try their best to appear strong. This leads me to another point pointed out by the author which I agree to a large extent. The author mentioned that to a man, checking with his wife will appear to his friends that he is being controlled by his wife and has no say in family matters. This once again supports that men generally have a larger ego as they want others to see them as the domineering one in the family and want to appear to others that they have a higher pedestal than women. This phenomenon is often seen in traditional families, especially the older generation as in those days, men were the sole breadwinner of the family, and thus, were seen as the leader of the family.

However, with feminism, women are generally less inclined to have their lives "interwined" with their spouse. Modern women want to appear independent, to appear stronger than men. There is an increasing trend that more men are staying at home to be househusbands due to rising feminism. I also noticed a contradicting view in the article. For the first example, she wrote that that man was upset because he had wondered why his wife could not have just put across her point plainly as a statement instead of posing it as a question. On the other hand,the author also wrote in the later part that men abhor being told what to do. I realised that this contradiction arises because no two men(or two women) are alike. Everyone is different and it is only with frequent communication and compromising can there be fewer conflicts among both genders today.

In conclusion, I feel that the writer tends to side with women and seem to be presenting a rather negative view of men. She seems to be suggesting strongly that males are generally chauvinistic individuals. However, the author had successfully presented how different the thinking process of both sides are and explained why it is often hard to comprehend the other gender.