It’s a gender thing (maybe)

During a recent conversation I was asking for help in clarifying a misunderstanding from a colleague. She began our conversation by saying, “It’s probably a gender thing.” I’ve never found that a helpful way to start a conversation. My thought was that in my experience, “It’s only a gender thing if you make it a gender thing.”

That’s not to say that we do not need to appreciate that males and females process emotions and cognition differently. There are legitimate reasons for allowing that gender perspectives are different and are influenced by both biology and enculturation. But to make gender the issue runs the risk of missing the issue.

It seems to me that to make everything a “gender thing” as a point of reference is to begin from a pseudo self stance. Taking that stance makes it too easy to focus on “the other.” It leaves persons who don’t want to do the hard work of understanding one another, or who don’t want to take responsibility for self, with the excuse of saying, “Well, he’s a man so he can’t understand,” or, “Well, she’s a woman so she just doesn’t get it.”

Conversely, it runs the risk of facilitating irresponsibility: “Well, I’m a guy so you’ll just have to deal with it. I can’t change who I am.” Or, “I’m a women, I can’t help feeling and thinking this way. You need to accept my feelings.”

Mature and self-differentiated persons have the capacity of allowing others to own their perspectives, and will strive to appreciate the others’ perspectives even if they can’t understand it. Whether or not one can ultimately understand another person’s perspective does not change the fact that at the end of the day each person needs to find the way to agree on what the issue is and how it needs to be resolved. And the issues that most of us deal with tend to be more about functioning and less about “a gender thing.” To overfocus on gender runs the risk of creating an impasse that leaves no common ground for communication or understanding. It puts “the other” in the pose of a pseudo-self who lacks the capacity to function beyond their biology. It judges the other not on their character, accomplishments, being or potential but solely on a secondary dimension of self.

Yes, biology, and gender, mediates a lot, but I don’t think it’s helpful to make it the starting point and end all of everything.