You are in a meeting, you master your subject, you have prepared your speech well and you intervene to bring your expertise and contribute to the collective reflection. And there you have it, a colleague cuts you off ! You bounce back and try your shot again, bam, he cuts it off you... And the re-re-cut.
You're not the paranoid type, but still, you have a doubt : wouldn't you, as a woman, be interrupted more ? Maybe it is... And this phenomenon even has a name : " manterrupting ".
We take stock of this notion, which has made a very special place in recent discussions on gender equality.
One night, at the MTV Video Music Awards...
A contraction of " man " and " interrupting ", " manterrupting " is defined as the fact that a man interrupts a woman while she is speaking, without it necessarily being relevant, and sometimes even to talk about something else.
The expression was born in 2015 by Jessica Bennett, a columnist for Time, to describe the attitude of singer Kanye West bursting onto the stage of the MTV Video Music Awards, as actress Taylor Swift began her acceptance speech for the award she had just received. Stealing the microphone from her, he steals the spotlight and cuts her off! A public outcry that ensues from an awareness of a parasitization of women's speech, far from being an isolated case.
A few days earlier, Sheryl Sandberg and Professor Adam Grant published an article in the New York Times entitled " Why Women Stay Quiet at Work " describing the same type of facts in the corporate world. In the process, many contributions reveal that it is also common in the media (see the video below), in politics, in the associative world, etc.
Manterrupting, mansplaining, bropropriating...
The appearance of the term " manterrupting " is accompanied, in many articles, by a return of the notion of " mansplaining ". This concept, coined and instructed by the writer Rebecca Solnit in 2008, describes the situation in which a man interrupts a woman to explain to her what she already knows and that she was sometimes just expressing. Often experienced by women as a sign of condescension, this behavior, which does not necessarily stem from bad intentions, is particularly frustrating !
There is also another shade of the same register : bropropriating. Here, we are talking about women who are dispossessed of their ideas by men who take them up on their own. Again, this is usually not malice, but the result of unconscious biases that keep people thinking that what a man says carries more weight, says management expert Arin N. Reeves.
A topic on the agenda of academics for (at least) 40 years
In 1975 : Men 47 times more " switches " than women
In 1975, the University of Santa Barbara published a study of 31 conversations between women and men that revealed that men were 47 times more likely than women to interrupt other people's words. And that it was primarily women who paid the price.
A " competition of the sexes " for the territories of speech ?
In 1981, the sociopsychologist Geoff Beatie published a major article in the journal Linguistics confirming a situation of " competition " between the sexes in the conquest of territories of speech : the new power issues resulting from the rise of women in the public space were transposed into the ordinary conversational space.
Real issues of gendered sharing of the expression of ideas are emerging, which reveal the existence of a kind of insulating layer of the glass ceiling soundproofing women's speech and cushioning their power of influence in the spaces of discussion.
Interrupting yes, but to say what ?
Over the next decade, the linguist Janet Holmes would investigate the differences between women and men in the content of interruptions in speech : she highlighted that, when men are mostly " decision-making switches " who intervene to invalidate, confirm, disqualify or validate the words of others, Women behave more like " complementary interrupters" who provide additional information and/or binding elements (encouragement, support, compliment, thanks) in the conversation.
A 1998 meta-analysis, conducted by psychology professeur.es Kristin J. Anderson and Campbell Leaper and covering three decades of studies, confirms a massive phenomenon and gender gaps in the reasons for unannounced interventions.
Women's self-censorship: lack of self-confidence or insufficient legitimacy granted ?
In 2002, the work of behavioural scientist Marianne Schmid Mast indicated the existence of a social function of speaking : individuals with a high status in society speak more often and at greater length. She then hypothesizes that the differences in speaking out between women and men are the result of their differences in status in society.
In other words, women's self-censorship stems more from a feeling of less legitimacy to express themselves in an insufficiently inclusive context than from a lack of self-confidence.
An issue that is beginning to integrate companies' gender diversity policies
Spotted for a long time by the scientific world, often denounced by the activist world, manterrupting is now challenging the business world. Indeed, the rise in maturity of equality policies has led to an increasingly detailed understanding of the obstacles to the affirmation of women in the professional field. We now know that the lack of diversity has its roots in complex mechanisms and many often unconscious, although deeply established, behaviors.
It is these obstacles, which are partly invisible to the naked eye, that must be tackled if we want to attract, retain and advance both women and men. Not to mention the fact that letting " speech thieves" act with impunity (albeit unintentionally) is to take the risk of depriving oneself of interesting ideas and/or of seeing distorted, if not outright erroneous, ideas retained for the sole reason that they have been brought by a more talkative, noisy and more legitimate interlocutor in appearance.
How to fight against manterrupting ?
Be aware !
As always in terms of diversity, awareness is essential. Let's get out of denial! A simple exercise allows you to fully appreciate manterrupting during a meeting, for example : appoint an observer who will count the gaps in speech and return the numerical results at the end of the exchange. You can also do this test at home, in front of the television or while listening to the radio.
Strengthen your listening and empathy !
Any impertinent interruption of the words of others exposes the switch itself, but also the entire audience, to a loss of knowledge and meaning.
Let's learn to hear the words of others but also the non-verbal signs that are an integral part of conversations. Whether we are in a position to speak or to listen, let us keep in mind the point of view of the other, to hear on the one hand the need to express oneself and on the other that of attentive ears. A good technique for more " listening " conversations is to practice the " 3-second method": leave 3 seconds of silence before bouncing back on what others are saying. Less is still evasion ; more, it is a sign of lack of cooperation.
The role of the " conductor "
Fighting " interrupting " is also the role of the leader. As a true " conductor ", he must ensure that all voices are heard.
Let's take the example of Glen Mazzara, producer (notably of the series The Walking Dead): although he had put together a team of screenwriters with parity and diversity, he was questioned by the women on his staff about their difficulties in expressing their ideas to the end. In short, they were victims of " manterrupting ". Realizing the facts only after the fact, Mazzara became aware of his passive complicity when he let men do what he did and gave more credence to their words. He then decided to introduce " no interrupting " in all his meetings : everyone has a full time to speak, at the end of which the critical debate is opened, before we decide together to move on to the next subject.
Work on posture and assert your right to speak
In a situation of " manterrupting ", it is not forbidden to be assertive. It is even highly recommended. When you are cut off, you are perfectly justified in protesting. Courteously but firmly : I apologize for me, I'll finish and let you answer afterwards !
If the problem is recurrent, why not discuss the rules of the game of conversation with the whole team, in a co-constructive spirit. Speaking turns need to be organized !
Playing the solidarity card
What if, like Obama's female staff, we used the strategy of amplification ? The women in the President's office had taken the very good habit of systematically repeating what one of them expressed, until the subject was on the agenda of the discussion, allowing the group's attention to be focused on the idea put forward. A formidably effective technique which, by Obama's own admission, has given a new dynamic to the exchanges in his team.
