First up, we have an anon, who posted the following insight:
Good post. You said:
"...you, being a simple man, often do not know that you are communicating these things..."
I would add that we often are not communicating anything at all beyond what we say, but regardless, a woman will "feel" that we did. As JLP says, "not all not all not all" but some.
This is, in my opinion, the female equivalent of men who think that women mean only what they say and would never play games. Women will assume that men communicate with their words plus everything else, because that is what they are used to from communicating with other women. The problem here is that men simply do not consciously control anything except their literal words and maybe their general facial expression. Maybe it is possible that men sub-consciously and unknowingly telegraph more through various other parts of their communicative output, but this tends to be rather unreliable. Sort of like how men can misinterpret a woman's words, women can and often do misinterpret a man's extraverbal communication.
Overall, thanks for the input!
The second, and second really good, comment comes to us from a 'Jasper':
All true.
And there is a weird (a?)symmetry:
Men also speak with a "multi-modal communication" that women do not understand. Most men have a better understanding of hunting games, including geometry, time, what it feels like to do something physically demanding, and big-picture history.
That Swiss army knife is a powerful tool, and most women are ignorant about it. They might admire a man who has mastered it, but they don't hope to understand it themselves.
This is definitely true, and only present in men. Specifically, it is present in groups of men who are extremely familiar and experienced with one another, such as a military unit or a really good sports team. There is a point where men form a sort of 'group chemistry'.
To illustrate this, allow me to describe an example from my high school basketball team. I practiced with this team twice a week, but I played with my friend Henni considerably more often than that. As such, I was extremely familiar with Henni's style of play and vice versa. This lead to somewhat ridiculous antics, such as myself turning around for no reason, right in time to catch one of Henni's long passes, despite him not calling anything. Similarly, I would screen players for no apparent reason, only to have Henni use the opportunity to get clear and score. My then-girlfriend asked if Henni and I had some manner of telepathic connection, which we obviously did not. It was just male extraverbal/multimodal communication. A 'masculine intuition', if you will.
Maybe this is what makes men's sports so much more interesting to watch than women's sports. Men's teams can co-ordinate a lot faster, as this 'masculine intuition' does the communication for them, whereas women have to stop, turn around, and look at everyone to get a consensus of what to do. That, and the fact that men are physically faster/stronger etc.
These differences make sense on a historical scale as well. Some manner of real-time non-verbal group communication makes a much more efficient hunting party, and reading faces allows you to communicate with people who cannot verbalize their needs ( cough small children cough ).
All in all, I'm very grateful for this excellent commentary, and I will keep advertising my blog exclusively on SocialGalactic, as I do not have to moderate at all right now.
No comments:
Post a Comment