|
April
Emotional Equality: Liberating Women and Men
What if something that almost everybody believes to
be true turns out not to be? Last month, in this
column and in many conversations, I challenged one
of the fundamental beliefs about the differences
between women and men. This belief tells us that,
by nature, men are more aggressive, violent, and
less empathic whereas women are cooperative,
peaceful and more empathic. The key here is
empathy, which is the ability to understand the
feelings and experiences of others. If one is more
empathic and, therefore experiences others as
sentient, thinking, feeling beings rather than
objects, one is more likely to care and cooperate
and less likely to harm and cause pain.
Let’s be clear, I am not saying that there
are no natural gender differences. Of course there
are. Likewise, It may be true that historically,
and even currently, women demonstrate more empathy
that men. I am suggesting that it is historical and
current access to power and not innate gender
differences that causes some of these differences
in behavior. I assert that men are equally able to
experience the whole range of human emotions,
including empathy. The greater emotionality
attributed to women has been used, in the past, to
argue that women are irrational and not suited for
positions of power and responsibility. Now,
strengthened by the ideas of psychologists such as
Carol Gilligan, some argue that women, with their
superior emotional functioning, will lead is into
an era of peace and respect for “mother
earth.”
As I said in last month‘s column, women in
power act much like men in power. Men without power
act much like women without power. People with
power are more direct, assertive and care less
about the feelings of others. People without power
have to be less direct, more deferential and
accommodating and more attuned to the feelings of
others -- especially about the feelings of those
who have the power. This is the argument made by
Rosalind Barnett and Caryl Rivers in their book
Same Difference.
I introduced this idea at a monthly salon that I
host. Some argued vehemently for the superior
emotional capacities of women, highlighting the
“hormone bath” that prepares an expectant
mother to bond with her child. However, the only
expectant mother at the salon argued that she
thought she and her husband were equally qualified
as parents. To highlight Barnett and Rivers’
argument about the effect of power differences, I
asked the group the following question: In America,
are people of color more aware or the moods and
attitudes of white people, or are white people more
aware of the moods and attitudes of people of
color? Attending this salon were five
African-Americans, one Asian American, one
immigrant from Europe, one immigrant from the
Middle East, and at one European-American (this
writer). The answer to my question was immediately
apparent to the group. People of color, just to
survive, have to be more aware of the moods and
attitudes of white people. That is because white
people occupy most positions of authority that
people of color have to interact with. On the
contrary, white people can more easily avoid
interacting with people of color, who less
frequently occupy positions of authority. When
white people do interact with people of color, it
is usually when people of color are providing them
with some service.. Therefore, white people do not
to have to be particularly concerned with reading
the moods and attitudes of people of color. Several
salon participants quickly saw the parallel. If men
occupy most positions of power, as we historically
have, women, just to survive, would have to be
attuned to men’s moods and attitudes.
This is a cornerstone of the argument put
forward by Barnett and Rivers The personality and
communication differences between women and men are
not due to inherent or biological differences, as
claimed by pop-psych entrepreneurs such as John
Gray. For example, if, in a business meeting, women
are less likely than men to interrupt someone else,
it is because, historically, they have had less
power and dared not interrupt. To test this, just
look at women who have achieved and grown
accustomed to positions of power. For example, for
several years I worked in programs funded through
Alameda County
Behavioral Healthcare Services, where the
Director and Associate Director are women who have
both been in their positions for many years. Either
of these women, when chairing a meeting, can
interrupt any participant, male or female, with a
speed, efficiency, and, if necessary, forcefulness
unrivaled by any man. If either woman is burdened
by an awareness that they might have hurt
someone’s feelings, there is no evidence of
it. In fact, I see no evidence, and am aware of no
evidence that women in positions of power
demonstrate more empathy, or other supposedly
female characteristics, than men in similar
positions.
Of course, none of this is simple. Women have
historically had some areas of power in some
cultures, especially as mothers. Many contemporary
American men report feeling overpowered by their
wives within the family. We do not have time to
address all of these complexities, however, I am
convinced that upon investigation, we would
discover that access to power affects behavior more
that alleged gender differences.
My whole point in writing this, is to debunk the
notion of female emotional superiority. This is an
idea that I think harms both women and men. It
harms men, because so many men devalue their own
emotional experience, thinking it inferior to
women’s In their marriages, friendships and
family relationships with women, many men feel
bewildered, overwhelmed, inferior and inadequate.
This does not benefit women in the long run,
because the man is likely to withdraw, isolate, get
angry and defensive, and, in some cases, resort to
controlling or violent behavior. When a man
understands, values and can articulate his own
emotional experience, he is more able to maintain a
close and mutually respectful relationship with a
woman.
My experience as a man and a psychotherapist, is
that men feel things very deeply. Given the
opportunity, a little encouragement, and a setting
they trust, most men are quite able to discuss
their emotional lives, especially with other men.
It is far easier than most therapists would
believe. Of course, it is essential to recognize
that the mode of feeling and the style of
communication is sometimes different that it would
be with a woman. Likewise, a little skill in
guiding such a conversation is important. I have
lead and/or participated in a few thousand group
and one on one conversations with men over the past
28 years. I have seen, over and over again, that
most men demonstrate tremendous empathy in dealing
with one another. In conversations regarding their
marriages and intimate relationships, most men
clearly value intimacy and know how to show love.
Most moving of all, is the tremendous love and
dedication that the majority of men have towards
their children. This is not to deny the violence
committed by some men, but to affirm the humanity
of most men.
Debunking female emotional superiority is
advantageous to women as well. It liberates them
from the “caring trap,” as Barnett and
Rivers call it, that pressure to live up to the
inflated expectations of feminine empathy. It could
also liberate psychotherapy from its obsession with
the mother-child relationship. Recently, I attended
the American Group Psychotherapy Conference in New
York. I was stunned that so many psychiatrists and
psychologists still focus so exclusively on the
mother, largely ignoring the role to the father.
While this may seem like honoring women, in fact,
much of the discussion of mothers is quite
negative, naming them as cause for all sorts of
psychiatric woes. Its time we released women from
the burden of being men’s “better
half,” while recognizing men’s full
humanity.
©2005, Gary
Hoeber
* * *
Psychology has a long past, but only a short
history. - Hermann Ebbinghaus
Gary
Hoeber has been working as a psychotherapist since
1976, helping a broad range of people successfully
deal with a wide variety of life challenges. He is
a leading practitioner and teacher of group
psychotherapy. An Instructor at John F. Kennedy
University since 1988, he offers classes on "The
Practice of Group Psychotherapy." His approach to
group therapy is highly interpersonal, assisting in
the development of effective communication and
relationship skills and increasing the capacity for
intimacy, friendship and community. His work with
individuals focuses less on pathology, and more on
the unfolding of one's life purpose, using a depth
psychology informed by poetry, story and mythology.
Gary is licensed as a Marriage and Family Therapist
and has offices in Berkeley and San Rafael,
California. garyhoeber.com
or gmhoeber@comcast.net.
Gary will also be reviewing important
new
books on
psychotherap
Disclaimer
| Privacy
Statement
Menstuff®
Directory
Menstuff® is a registered trademark of The
National Men's Resource Center™
©1996-2023, The National Men's Resource
Center
|
