Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Symbolic segregation: Similarities and differences in the language and non-verbal communication of women and men

  • Articles
  • Published:
Sociological Forum

Abstract

Societies use symbolic means to segregate the sexes conceptually as well as physically. Social rules designate some forms of verbal and non-verbal communication according to sex, to maintain distinctions. This paper explores both the non-verbal means of communication and the content and form of verbal modes as they are related to (1) the creation and maintenance of gender distinctions, (2) the symbolic ways they reinforce social arrangements between the sexes, and (3) the problems of analysis researchers have found in attempting to describe and explain sex differences in communication. The paper points out that in the field of language and communication there has been a tendency to emphasize the findings of differences between the sexes rather than of similarities. It also illustrates that linguistic differences tend to be superficial, to be linked to power differentials, and to be context specific. The paper concludes that these differences are socially created and therefore may be socially altered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Association for Women in Psychology, Ad Hoc Committee on Sexist Language 1975 “Eliminating sexist language: The can, should and how to.” Paper presented at the Open Forum meeting of the A.P.A., Chicago, August.

  • Barron, Nancy 1971 “Sex-typed language: The production of grammatical cases.”. Acta Sociologica 14:24–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthes, Roland 1983 The Fashion System. Translated by Matthew Ward and Richard Howard. New York: Hill and Wang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baxter, J. C. 1970 “Interpersonal spacing in natural settings.” Sociometry 33:444–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem S. L. 1975 “Sex-role adaptability: One consequence of psychological androgyny.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31:634–643.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, Sandra andDaryl Bem 1973 “Does sex-biased job advertising aid and abet sex discrimination?” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 3 (1):6–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birdwhistell, Raymond T. 1970 Kinesics and Context: Essays of Body Motion Communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaubergs, Maija S. 1978 “Changing the sexist language: The theory behind the practice.” Psychology of Women Quarterly 2:244–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodine, Ann 1975 “Androcentrism in prescriptive grammar: Singular ‘they’ sex indefinite ‘he’ and ‘he’ or ‘she’.” Language in Society 4(2):129–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulding, Elise 1980 “The labor of farm women in the United States: A knowledge gap.” Sociology of Work and Occupations 7(August):261–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briere, John andCheryl Lanktree 1983 “Sex-role related effects of sex bias in language.” Sex Roles 9:625–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, Dede 1982 “The influence of the addressee's sex on politeness in language use.” Linguistics 20:697–711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, P. andS. Levinson 1978 “Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena”. In E. N. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness:56–289. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck, R., R. E. Miller andW. F. Caul 1974 “Sex, personality and physiological variables in the communication of emotion via facial expression.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 30:587–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cherulnik, P. D. 1979 “Sex differences in the expression of emotion in a structured social encounter.” Sex Roles 5:413–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condry, John andSandra Condry 1976 “Sex differences: A study of the eye of the beholder.” Child Development 47:812–819.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conklin, N. F. 1974 “Toward a feminist analysis of linguistic behavior.” The University of Michigan Papers in Women's Studies 1:51–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coser, Rose Laub 1960 “Laughter among colleagues.” Psychiatry 23:81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crosby, F. andL. Nyquist 1977 “The female register: An empirical study of Lakoff's hypothesis.” Language in Society 6:313–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, C. J. andL. A. Gilbert 1976 “Sex role stereotypes: Effect on perception of self and others and on personal adjustment.” Journal of Counsulting Psychology 23:373–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, S. andD. Fiske 1977 Face-to-face Interaction: Research, Methods, and Theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enarson, Elaine 1974 Woods-Working Women: Sexual Integration in the U. S. Forest Service. University, AL: University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs forthcoming Deceptive Distinctions: Theory and Research on Sex, Gender and the Social Order. New York: Russell Sage, forthcoming.

  • 1985 “Ideal roles and real roles or the fallacy of the misplaced dichotomy.” Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 4:29–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs 1984 “Ideal images and real roles.” Dissent (Fall):441–447.

  • 1981 Women in Law. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1971 “Law partners and marriage partners: Strains and solutions in the dual-career family enterprise.” Human Relations 24(6):549–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1970 Woman's Place: Options and Limits in Professional Careers. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ervin-Tripp, S. 1971 “Sociolinguists.” In J. A. Fishman (ed.), Advances in the Sociology of Language:15–151. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fierstein, Bruce 1982 Real Men Don't Eat Quiche. New York: Pocket Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, Pamela 1982 “Interaction: The work that women do.” In Kahn-Hut, Daniels and Colvard (eds.), Women and Work. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogarty, Michael P., et al. 1971 Women in Top Jobs: Four Studies in Achievement. Prepared jointly by Political and Economic Planning and the Tavistock Institute. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogarty, Michael P., Rhona Rapoport andRobert N. Rapoport 1971 Sex, Career and Family. Prepared jointly by Political and Economic Planning and the Tavistock Institute. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frances, S. J. 1979 “Sex differences in non-verbal behavior.” Sex Roles 5:519–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garfinkle, Harold 1956 “Conditions of successful degradation ceremonies.” American Journal of Sociology 61 (March):420–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1967 “The nature of deference and demeanor.” In Erving Goffman (ed.), Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face to Face Behavior:47–96. Garden City, NJ: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1976 Gender Advertisements. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goleman, Daniel 1985 Vital Lies, Simple Truths: The Psychology of Self-Deception. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, A. 1973 “The making of a non-sexist dictionary.” Ms December:12–14,16.

  • 1966 The Hidden Dimension. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1968 “Proxemics.” Current Anthropology 9:83–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harper andRow 1976 Harper and Row Guidelines on Equal Treatment of the Sexes in Textbooks. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1973 “Status and sex: Some touching observations.” Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 17:79–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1973–1974 “Power, sex and nonverbal communication.” Berkeley Journal of Sociology 18:1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1977 Body Politics: Power, Sex and Nonverbal Communication. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiatt, M. 1977 The Way Women Write. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilpert, F. C., C. Kramer andR. A. Clark 1975 “Participants' perceptions of self and partner in mixed-sex dyads.” Central States Speech Journal 26(1):52–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, Lynette 1974 “Analysis of supportive and assertive behavior in conversation.” Paper presented at Linguistic Society of America meeting, New York, July.

  • Hollander, Anne 1978 Seeing through Clothes. New York: Viking Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holt, Rinehart andWinston 1976 The Treatment of Sex Roles and Minorities. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, Joan 1976 “Sociology.” Signs 1:685–698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ickes, W. andR. D. Barnes 1977 “The role of sex and self-monitoring in unstructured dyadic interactions.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35:315–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jespersen, Otto 1924 Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin. New York: Henry Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, Peter 1983 “Judge overturns finding by jury of sex bias in newscaster's suit.” New York Times, 1 November:1.

  • Kerr, Peter 1984a “Jury selection begins in retrial of Craft case.” New York Times, 5 January:18.

  • Kerr, Peter 1984b “Jury awards Chris Craft $325,000.” New York Times, 14 January:13.

  • Klein, H. M. andL. Willerman 1979 “Psychological masculinity and feminity and typical and maximal dominance expression in women.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37:2054–2070.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollock, Peter, Philip Blumstein andPepper Schwartz 1985 “Sex and power in interaction: Conversational privileges and duties.” American Sociological Review 50:34–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1974 “Folklinguistics.” Psychology Today 8:82–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1975 “Women's speech: Separate but unequal?” In Thorne and Henley (eds.), Language and Sex:43–56. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, Cheris, Barrie Thorne andNancy Henley 1978 “Review essay: Perspectives on language and communication.” Signs 3:638–651.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramarae, Cheris 1981 Women and Men Speaking: Frameworks for Analysis. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaFrance, Marianne 1981 “Gender gesture: Sex, sex role and nonverbal communication.” In Clara Mayot and Nancy Henley (eds.), Gender and Nonverbal Behavior:129–150. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1973 “Language and woman's place.” Language and Society 2:45–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1975 Language and Woman's Place. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, Barbara 1974 “Dirty wordscan harm you.” Redbook 143(May):33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Legman, D. 1968 Rationale of the Dirty Joke: An Analysis of Sexual Humor. Memphis, TN: Castle Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorber, Judith K. 1984 Women Physicians: Careers, Status and Power. New York: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lurie, Alison 1981 The Language of Clothes. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martyna, Wendy 1980 “Beyond the ‘he/man’ approach: The case for nonsexist language.” Signs 5:482–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell-Ginet, Sally 1978 “Intonation in a man's world.” Signs 3:541–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1957 Social Theory and Social Structure: Toward the Codification of Theory and Research. Glencoe, Il: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 1984 “The fallacy of the latest word.” American Journal of Sociology 89:1091–1121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Casey andKate Swift 1972 “De-sexing the English language.” Ms 1 (Spring):7.

    Google Scholar 

  • New York Times 1983 “Judge upholds award to TV anchorwoman.” 1 September:18.

  • 1972 “Sexism in English: A feminist view.” In Hoffman, Secor and Tinsley (eds.), Female Studies, Vol. 6:102–109. Old Westbury: Feminist Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilsen, Alleen Pace 1973 “The correlation between gender and other semantic features in American English.” Paper presented at Linguistic Society of America meetings, San Diego, December.

  • Prentice-Hall 1975 Prentice-Hall Author's Guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Random House 1975 Guidelines for Multiethnic/Nonsexist Survey. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H., E. Schegloff, andG. Jefferson 1974 “A simplest systematics for the organization of turntaking for conversation.” Language 50:696–735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sattel, Jack W. 1982 “The inexpressive male: Tragedy or sexual politics?” In Kahn-Hut, Daniels and Colvard (eds.), Women and Work:160–169. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, Muriel R. 1975 “The semantic derogation of women.” In Thorne and Henley (eds.), Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance:64–75. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepelak, Norma 1978 “Does ‘he’ mean ‘she’ too? The case of the generic anomaly.” Unpublished manuscript.

  • Soskin, W. F. andV. P. John 1963 “The study of spontaneous talk,” in Barker (ed.). The Stream of Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stier, Deborah S. andJudith A. Hall 1984 “Gender differences in touch: An empirical and theoretical review.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47:440–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strodtbeck, Fred L. andRichard D. Mann 1956 “Sex role differentiation in jury deliberations.” Sociometry 19:3–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorne, Barrie 1976 Review of Language and Woman's Place, by Robin Lakoff. Signs 1:744–745.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorne, Barrie andNancy Henley, eds. 1975 Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorne, Barrie, Cheris Kramarae andNancy Henley 1983 “Language, gender and society: Opening a second decade of research.” In Thorne et al. (eds.), Language, Gender and Society:7–24. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walshok, Mary 1981 Blue Collar Women. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whorf, Benjamin L. 1956 Language, Thought and Reality. Edited by John B. Carroll. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Brenda 1984 “Second co-anchor charges bias.” New York Times, 21 September:23.

  • Wood, Marion M. 1966 “The influence of sex and knowledge of communication effectiveness on spontaneous speech.” Word 22:112–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanna, Mark P. andSusan J. Pack 1975 “On the self-fulfilling nature of apparent sex differences in behavior.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 11:583–591.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, D. H. andC. West 1975 “Sex roles, interruptions and silences in conversation. In Thorne and Henley (eds.), Language and Sex:105–129. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Russell Sage Foundation and Graduate Center, City University of New York, USA

    Cynthia Fuchs Epstein

Authors
  1. Cynthia Fuchs Epstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Epstein, C.F. Symbolic segregation: Similarities and differences in the language and non-verbal communication of women and men. Sociol Forum 1, 27–49 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01115072

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01115072

Keywords

Search

Navigation