Gender differences, master suppression techniques, blaming the victim, keeping silent of shame…

Some loud thoughts in different directions and on different subjects.

Struck me about a former (second) boss after a phone call this morning with my second boss (where I got really angry, didn’t say yes or agree with everything he said, but tried to stay calm): Stiff (rigid) and inflexible, didn’t dare making own decisions at work. A stickler for details, a bureaucrat. Following the text-book totally.

Compared him with my current second boss. Struck me that some things worked better with the former, but... I wouldn’t want to have him back as boss anyway! But there were SOME advantages with the former.

Also thought about saying what you think, raising your voice. Because I wondered how much more I should say actually. And if I should raise my voice at all at the meeting after lunch, where what we had spoken about on phone should become taken up.

At a quite recent occasion I raised my voice and was told by my female boss:

“Now you have spoken almost all the time (during this meeting).”

She meant dominated it, on behalf of the two men (and her?)? I got a bit confused didn’t really know. But didn’t try to clear this up by asking:

“Please explain what you mean! Shall I be quiet?”

Shame on me who didn't! My own fault I am stuck with wonders!

And hmmm, isn’t this one of the Master suppression techniques in fact? I was fighting for things at our workplace for us all.

“Damn if you do and damn if you don’t.”

or something?

I haven’t been the one speaking up earlier. Rather very quite and back drawn, so… I really wonder, if somebody had measured the time each one spoke in that group (we spoke about the psycho-social environment at our workplace and a survey all had answered on our workplace anonymously!), maybe they would have found that I wasn’t the one speaking most of all four there? Or maybe “only” as much as my boss and another man.

It’s still so (despite all awareness about those things) that our “perception” of what we hear say us that a woman has spoken much more than a man even when she hasn’t. Because we are brought up that “the woman keeps silent in the congregation”?

When I studied pedagogy over 20 years ago at the University of Uppsala we spoke about how astounded teachers became when researchers told them that what they experienced in the classroom wasn’t true: that the girls were talking as much or even much more than the boys. Even when it was the opposite, that bys were talking much more.

We have an expression here (apropos raising our voices), translated it would be “talk in the corridors.” Instead of speaking up on meetings people are talking in the corridors. But how come? Why are people (quite ironically)?

Because they are silenced with different means, quite abruptly if needed?

Another thing I thought of was that clarity (legibility) is important so people know what they are supposed to, where the workplace is heading etc. And when you work with young people it is important being consequent. But this doesn’t mean you have to be rigid. Being consequent doesn’t have to be the same thing as being rigid. But of course it can be. As often is.

I also thought on self blame yesterday.

Had another phone call with a person standing close who said about her baking and dropping a bowl of dough on the floor:

“I made a (terrible) slip-up (tabbe in Swedish)!”

But nobody died because she did this.

Doing blunders or slip-ups or making mistakes are forbidden! Entirely forbidden.

Further on blame: you can also blame other people, the victim for instance.

“Blame yourself! Your own fault (that you became badly treated)!”

Making the victim feel shame. Making her/him crouch down and keep silent. Maybe even afraid?

“I am so bad! I deserve this!”

This can become used deliberately, to infuse shame and guilt.