Gender and Conversation Possessiveness vs.

Gender and Conversation

Possessiveness vs. Resistance in the Language

The election of Barack Obama prompted many to assume that the United States has become a post-racial society. It would be interesting to ask whether the election of a woman to Presidency would mark the beginning of a post-sexist society. The answer to that question would certainly be a resounding "no," since in both cases the problem is far deeper in the society. The idea that men have the right to possess and own while women need to "know their place" is quite widespread even today. Some people express that blatantly and others believe in the idea on a subconscious level. Many women, unwilling or unable to challenge the status quo, often go along with these dominant discourses, but most women tend to resist. And in many cases, resistance pays off, forcing men to become more conciliatory and compromising. And this conflict between men's possessiveness and women's resistance is also expressed in a daily conversational language.

As Rebecca Solnit explains, many men operate in their relations with women with an "archipelago of arrogance," assuming that women are inherently deficient in their thinking and that they should not challenge men's confidence since the latter "is not their world" (Solnit, 2008). Solnit makes it clear that this is not necessarily the case with all men, but with some of them. Those "some," however are quite many. She tells the story about a party she attended and a man there talked to her in such an arrogant and patronizing manner that at a certain moment Solnit's self-confidence was shaken although the man's presumptuous confidence was totally baseless while her confidence was sound.

Though in this case Solnit's interlocutor was a blatant sexist, even in supposedly happy marriages where husbands are sensitive to modern feminist ideas, the syndrome of possessiveness vs. resistance plays its role. Such examples are given in Tannen's (n.d.) article. For instance, a guy named Josh once invited his high-school friend to stay at his place for a weekend without notifying his wife beforehand. When his wife was upset and asked him "why don't you tell your friend you have to check with your wife?," he said, "I can't tell my friend, 'I have to ask my wife for permission'!" (Tannen, n.d.). This conversation illustrates that Josh is not necessarily a man who sounds like a sexist in his relationship with his wife, but he gives in to the societal pressure, which suggests that men are the ones who must own and possess, while women's role is to follow and serve.

In another case, Tannen talks about a wife named Diana who likes making suggestions to her husband by starting her statements with "let's," like "let's park over there" or "let's clean up now, before lunch." Although, Diana's purpose in making these suggestions is precisely to make suggestions, her husband began to resist them, assuming that Diana was trying to manipulate with him and control him (Tannen, n.d.). So strong is the idea among many men that men should be the ones controlling and owning that Diana's husband took it to a new level, being obsessed with the idea and resisting genuine suggestions of her wife's for fear of losing what he believed was his possession.

Women do resist these hierarchical gendered relationships. Tannen mentions another case, involving a couple. Because of the husband's decision to make decisions for her, the wife often had to drive old used cars that constantly required repair. The husband always had his way and the wife complied. But after barely escaping an accident due to bad breaks, the wife in the next car shopping decided to insist on a car of her choosing. To the wife's surprise, the husband did not protest at all. As Tannen explains the wife's discovery, "a little conflict won't kill you. At the same time, men who habitually oppose others can adjust their style to opt for less confrontation" (Tannen, n.d.). As I argued at the beginning, resistance pays off. The example discussed here is the testament to this fact.