Muted Group Theory - The Control Men Have Over Communication

The Control Men Have Over Communication

Kramarae believes that men control communication because men created language. This leaves women at a disadvantage because they are always using a man’s words to describe female thoughts and feelings. Using men’s words is a disadvantage to women because Kramarae believes that “Women perceive the world differently from men because of women’s and men’s different experience and activities rooted in the division of labor” (p. 456). She also believes that men and women are vastly different and thus will view the world differently from men. Kramerae believes that communication between men and women is not on an even level. This is because language is man made. This makes it easier for men to communicate over women. The Symbolic Interactionism Theory believes that 'the extent of knowing is the extent of naming (pg 462).' When applying this to muted group, this means women have an extreme disadvantage over men because they are the namers.

Kramarae also explains that men’s control over language has produced an abundance of derogatory words for women and their speech patterns. Some of these include names such as slut, whore, easy lay along with speech patterns such as gossiping, whining, and bitching. Men, however have much fewer names to describe themselves and most of them are seen in a positive/ sexual light. These include words such as stud, player, and pimp (p. 465). Kramarae suggests these harmful words shape our reality. She believes that “words constantly ignored may eventually come to be unspoken and perhaps even unthought.” This can lead women to doubt themselves and the intentions of their feelings (p. 465). Women are at a disadvantage once again. If a man has multiple sexual partners he can be seen as the words previously stated. However these words do not have a negative connotation. If women have multiple sexual partners, the words to describe her are much different than the words to describe a man. These carry negative connotations.

Kramarae also says that women need to choose their words carefully in public. This is because according to Kramarae “what women want to say and can say best cannot be said easily because the language template is not of their own making” (p. 459). “Another example of this male-dominated language Kramarae brings up is that in public speaking, women most often use sports and war analogies (things most women do not usually associate themselves to) in order to relate to their male audiences. Women do this to accomplish their objectives of getting ahead in life. This, they feel, is difficult if they do not gear their speech toward men, using words and analogies to which they can relate. This stems from the market being dominated by males for so long. Almost all prominent authors, theorists, and scientists have historically been male. This allows for them to give women the "facts" they should believe about society and life in general."

Kramarae believes that “males have more difficulty than females in understanding what members of the other gender mean.” Dale Spender of Woman’s Studies International Quarterly gave insight into Kramarae’s statement by adding the idea that many men realize by listening to women they would be revoking some of their power and privilege. “The crucial issue here is that if women cease to be muted, men cease to be so dominant and to some males this may seem unfair because it represents a loss of rights.” A man can easily avoid this issue by simply stating “I’ll never understand women” (p. 461).