Often when I read about ‘Personality types’ or behavioral patters, I try to identify whether I agree with the statement being made by comparing the claims to my own behavior (bizarre as my behavior sometimes seems). I found myself unintentionally using this method to test the theories presented by Tannen in “Put down that paper and talk to me!”
To preface my analysis, I should tell you a little about myself. I am, by nature, relatively shy. In High School, I made a conscious effort to overcome my introversion and succeeded to my liking. Whether my change socializing skills were more a result of my efforts or just a bi-product of growing up I don’t think I shall ever know, but regardless of reason I ended up being a relatively typical male student. With my friends, however, I’m pretty loud. I usually joke around a lot and interject my opinions when nobody seeks them. When we play x-box against each other from separate rooms, I have no trouble shouting over 8-12 people in order to be sure my trash talking is audible throughout the house.
Knowing all of this, despite some obvious similarities, has lead me to a less than conclusive conclusion (yes, I said conclusive conclusion). I do, as far as I can tell, talk more readily at parties than at home or other events, which is part of Tannen’s case. However, most of the time I know, or am good friends with, just about everyone attending the few parties I go to. I would not be nearly as comfortable with a group of strangers. Also, I am still reluctant to speak up in a class or discussion unless I believe that I am going to contribute something significant enough to be worth the time people spend listening to me. I don’t devalue my own belief but I also try not to overestimate the importance of my opinions; I learn more when others talk than when I talk, so unless I think I will teach somebody something then I usually keep my mouth shut.
So, all of that being said, I suppose I should draw some deduction from my ramblings. In my estimation, the possibility that my own, sometimes odd, behavior may be the exception rather than the rule far outweighs the possibility that Tannen is mistaken. I think the fact that my behavior follows her rules as closely as it does is proof enough, for me at least, that she probably knows what she is talking about.
2 comments:
I think your analysis of why you are sometimes the exception to Tannen's generalization about men talking in public makes sense. I'm also a pretty shy person, so I don't enjoy class discussions where I feel like I have to somehow earn the upper hand against my classmates, and hence I speak rarely (but when I do speak, it's usually pretty insightful...it's a good way to fool people into thinking you're brilliant).
You can’t be Padang without the Wang, a funny play on history. But you would have to know a lot about the Malaysian people. Anyway, I agree is the article about food or slavery, or slavery food. Or maybe food as slaves? I got very confused when reading it; it wasn’t very clear in that regard. But from what you have said it is only natural that you think of something familiar with when you hear a specific word. I am sure that people of origin or different “thought to be” discriminated groups’ think of things that discriminate against others. I know I sure do! Hypocrite!
Post a Comment