Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.






has anyone else noticed there’s a very specific way women interrupt each other in conversation that’s quite distinct from the way men interrupt women in conversation? like, women seem to interject a lot more– not as a silencing tactic, but to show their enthusiasm or agreement, cause they perceive a conversation as kind of collaborative, organic exercise. but i feel like men get really annoyed if you excitedly interject when they’re saying something (most specifically in a debate/discussion context) because they perceive conversation as something combative or competitive and see an interjection as a threat or a challenge. i’ve also noticed men dismiss women’s way of talking as being sort of incomprehensible and nonsensical because of this habit we have of seeming to butt in or finish each others sentences excitably. 

This was actually very interestingly used in Mad Max and was a stylistic choice in the way the wives spoke to each other, or at other people as a collective.

They finished each others sentences, interjected constantly, echoed important points in reverence/understanding/agreement and relied on each other to complete the communication of a thought or a concept to someone outside their circle.  

So like, instead of one of them explaining something, they would all add fragments to form a complete thought.

The Vuvalini: What’s there to find at the Citadel?

Max: Green.

Toast: And water. There’s a ridiculous amount of clear water. And a lot of crops.

The Dag: It’s got everything you need, as long as you’re not afraid of heights.

Keeper of the Seeds: Where does the water come from?

Toast: [regarding Immortan Joe] He pumps it up from deep within the earth. He calls it “Aqua Cola” and claims it all for himself.

The Dag: And because he owns it, he owns all of us.
Capable: We are not things!

Cheedo: No!

The Dag: Cheedo, we are not things!

We are not things.

Cheedo: I don’t want to hear that again!

Capable: They were her words.

Cheedo: And now she’s dead!

The Dag: Wring your hands and tear your hair, but you’re not going back. You’re not going back to him.

Interestingly, the Vuvalini do this as well. 

Everyone else in the movie (including furiosa!) speaks in short definitive statements or exclamations that cannot be piled upon or interrupted. So this was definitely done on purpose. 

its very cool.

 I wonder if this is just a thing in english/western culture or if other groups of women speak to each other like this?

also theirs a bunch of people in the notes fighting about “I HATE GETTING INTERRUPTED”

This isn’t so much a classic “interruption”.  like when someone talks over you to change the subject or say something unrelated or better than what you’re saying and stealing the attention from you,etc.

Its more like the person doing the interruption is expecting you not to really stop talking, or expects you to finish your thought, and is only interrupting to agree/ interject a footnote that is contributory, but not distracting.

So it would look like.

Woman 1 and 2 telling a story to woman 3:

Woman 1
“We sat down and he brought out this really good green tea-
Woman 2: –but it was the powder kind of green tea not the bag kind–
Woman1: –yeah and he brought out these really cool whisks and let us do it ourselves–
Woman 2: and Woman 1 frothed hers so much she had nothing left!
Woman 3: omg did you like it? was it good?
Woman 1 and 2 in unison: Yes! 
Woman 1: We should go again together sometime.
Woman 2- yeah I think you’d really like it too!

 See how Woman 1 is the alpha speaker (the person telling the story) and Woman 2 is the…. hype man? for lack of a better word. Every sentence that Woman 1 says is the story, and woman 2 is adding smaller clarification related details. And when she adds a dynamic detail  “had nothing left!” it is an excited interjection that continues the story, without taking ownership of the topic. 

Woman 3 will walk away from this conversation feeling that Woman 1 was the expert on this situation, but that Woman 2 had a particularly exciting time.

there was a study on this precisely that I read about, though I’ll need my pc to retrieve it. It was about how women tendentially see conversation as collaborative while men tendentially treat it as competitive, thus women usually interrupt to agree/interject to encourage, while men more often interrupt to talk over and/or demonstrate superior knowledge on a topic.

The study was probably Deborah Tannen, she found that women use more of what she called overlapping speech, such as “yup”, “right”, etc. and men are more likely to change the subject. In either the same study or a similar study she found that in the case where someone such as a friend talks about a problem or negative experience or feeling, women are more likely to respond with emotional support and understanding, whereas men are more likely to try to offer practical advice, and this can lead to misunderstandings.

Don't be the product, buy the product!