You talk to him about the incident that happened at work. While you are speaking, he suggests that you talk to your supervisor approximately forty seconds after you start describing the incident.

Then you feel like he is not even listening, but he’s at least partly right. You should talk to your supervisor. The point is, you asked for help, and it’s challenging to explain why that’s not the point right now without sounding like you’re rejecting it.

And what do you say? ‘Yeah, maybe. ‘ And that’s the end of the discussion for him. He thinks everything went well. Nothing has changed since you started, and you still don’t know if you are allowed to feel a little worse.

And then everyone always goes back to the same old conclusion: males are naturally adept at finding answers. I explained the problem, and he gave me the solution. It’s just a convergence of biological drives in a kitchen. Women process by talking; men process through action. Reason why men offer solutions when women talk about something?

That’s a tidy story. And it failed every direct test that was applied to it.

A short version

• This idea that women are more likely to give empathy and men to give answers came from popular literature in the early 1990s, not studies or research.
• Researchers found that when people do say something to someone in distress, the most common response from both sexes is problem-focused assistance, and the least common is emotion-focused support.
• In those studies, women included more discussion of feelings and of concrete examples of their acts than did men. They were often more active.
• There was one obvious difference, and it had nothing to do with giving advice. When males talked about problems, they tended to downplay the seriousness of the situation.
• The most important factor in determining whether a man would respond positively is not sex. It is contingent upon whether he’s stressed out.
• That’s right, the fix has nothing to do with him being an inherently different kind of creature and everything to do with timing and framing.

What research on why men offer solutions actually discovered?

A study published in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships most clearly demonstrated the evidence for this view. Researchers Susan Dun and Daena Goldsmith studied communication. It’s the design that’s the utility. It captured people’s genuine reactions to distress, rather than their reported responses, which are often influenced by their self-perceptions.

119 participants were asked to imagine seven different situations where somebody was in a real jam. A best friend who had failed an important exam. A first-year student struggling to make friends or get dates. A close friend who had just been dumped by her boyfriend. Each participant responded by writing their own real thoughts and feelings as if they were speaking directly to the other.

They then categorized each response into one of three categories.

• Issue-based discourse that evaluates the situation independently. “Failing one exam is serious, but it’s not the end of the world.”
• Dialogs that center on the feelings of the speaker. “You must feel terrible.”
• constructive criticism that gives them a course of action to take. “Study sooner for the next one.”

If the news report were true, it would have been easy to see the trend. The guys would tend to answer more in an action-oriented fashion. There, the ladies were to meet and hold an emotional discourse. A clean break, just as the love gurus have predicted for the past 30 years, was the outcome.

No, the numbers didn’t show that.”

Most of both sexes preferred problem-oriented help. Emotionally oriented support was infrequent in both groups. In all seven cases the relative frequency of various kinds of help used by men and women was much the same.

The discovery there throws the whole paradigm into question. You should read it again. The problem is not that women are more emotionally expressive than men. The emotional response is rarely the first step. Facing a problem head-on requires more than just a man. It is a common human tendency, and men are often held responsible for it.

The factor that makes it even more complicated

The data did not agree with each other. Everybody’s assumed differences are simply false.

Men’s responses were about 26% shorter than women’s. The stereotype has stuck probably because it generates a significant amount of discussion about emotions.

But women were more likely than men to talk about concrete steps that could be taken. Please give more guidance. We need more direction, more specific recommendations, and more telling people what to do.

So women did not prefer empathy to guidance in this picture. So it seems to reason that women were the ones saying more overall and so would produce more of both. The stereotype persists because it contrasts the emotional content of women with that of males and at the same time quietly does not notice that women were at the same time giving better advice.

That imbalance makes apparent something many couples know. When she gives him words of wisdom, she usually seems caring. Most of the time, the advice he gives her is effective. They both act the same, but one has a lot of noise surrounding it and the other has none, so the reception is different.

Women were not looking for advice; they were looking for empathy. They were more empathetic and more guiding than the males. They were just saying more and more.

Who or what began the legend

That idea has a clear source, and it is important to know what that is, because it explains why we see this belief more as a truth than as a claim.

In her 1990 book You Just Don’t Understand, Deborah Tannen proposed the report-talk and rapport-talk gender gap. In this account, men transmit information and assert their status through speech. Women use it to connect. John Gray did the same in 1992 with Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus, which was one of the best-selling books of the decade. There was a lady who had to be heard, not fixed, and a man who retreated to his cave.

The combined effect of these two novels was remarkable. It stopped being a theory after they made a reasonable-sounding intuition part of people’s language about relationships. The essence turned into water. Couples counselors said it again. Based on it, columns were published in magazines. And, after all these years, nearly everyone still uses it as their first explanation for this same situation.

But the trouble lay in the results of the researchers’ search for proof.

In 1999 Goldsmith and a colleague published an evaluation of Tannen’s claims under the fairly direct title “You just don’t have the evidence.” They worked through the actual empirical basis for the report-talk and rapport-talk distinction and found it much thinner than its influence suggested.

Five years later Sex Roles published a more exhaustive analysis, which went yet further. This article, titled “The Myth of Gender Cultures,” examined how men and women responded to and provided supportive communication in various workplaces, revealing more similarities than differences.

But academic counter-arguments don’t sell in the tens of millions, and so none of this ever made it to the mainstream. The first claim went around as soon as the paperback came out. The revision circulated at peer-review speed, which is to say it was largely ignored.

It is no mark, therefore, of ill-judging that you have held this opinion of men. Every credible source told you about it for thirty years.

When did it become so real?

This is the most important element, as what you are experiencing is real. Something happens in these conversations that makes you feel like you weren’t heard. The popular explanation is correct as to the incident but wrong as to the cause.

There are three things going on at the same time, and the first one gets very little attention.

1. Not the advice, but the downplay

The sex difference observed in the Goldsmith and Dun data is the most pronounced, even more so than the difference in advice-giving.

Male respondents observed the issue more frequently. A lot of the problem-solving talk was about denying that the problem existed.

And then when you make that real, it’s like

• “Not that big of a deal.”
• “You’re overthinking this.”
• “Honestly, he wasn’t worth it anyway.”
• “I wouldn’t worry about it.”
• “She probably didn’t mean it like that.

Each one of them has a charitable intention. The reason is simple and almost tender: you are bothered, and so the thing that is bothering you seems smaller to me than it does to you. So if I can change your perception of how large it is, then your distress should go down. He is not, specifically, ignoring you. What he’s trying to give you is a more comfortable measurement.

That’s the problem. What it does when it arrives. Before you can recognize anything, someone has already challenged your interpretation of your position. Instead of discussing your day, the conversation has subtly shifted to a debate about your judgment, as you are now defending the idea that the issue you raised is indeed a problem.

In my experience, that feeling afterward primarily stems from feeling ignored and not being able to think of anything nasty to say if asked. Feeling ignored & not being able to think of anything nasty to say if asked. Every place was kindness. Something was played up.

It also explains the inadequacy of the phrase “he gives advice instead of listening” in conveying the grievance. It is easy to reject unsolicited advice. If someone tells you your problem isn’t that bad, it’s harder to dismiss that advice because accepting it means blaming yourself for your problems, and that’s just not nice.

2. “Stress” is the real deal

The second view is from a better-designed study in the field that redefines the whole topic.

UCLA scientists followed 189 couples for 4 years and found they were all intensely happy in their relationship. Instead of asking participants to rate their level of support, the researchers altered the circumstances under which the couples interacted. Couples experienced one of three situations: both partners had a stressful day, neither had a stressful day, or one partner had a stressful day while the other did not. Later, their subsequent dialogs were recorded and coded, including non-verbal cues such as eye contact and hand-holding.

The point is this: when one partner wasn’t stressed, the other gave lots of positive reinforcement. Men were a little more pessimistic than women, but the difference was negligible, and both sexes did admirably. There just weren’t many competent people sitting around.

When the strain was applied, there was a change. The researchers observed that men who were already stressed were more likely to become emotionally overwhelmed in these scenarios, displaying less empathy and a generally negative demeanor.

The attention given to that word is also a result of the same physiological overload that causes men to withdraw during confrontations. When you try to have a difficult conversation, your heart rate increases, your adrenaline levels spike, and your mental resources start to run out. The first to go are watching closely. Keeping two points of view Using the right language

Imagine what the practical consequences of a solution would be for a man in that position. This is the most efficient solution. It meets the need, breaks the cycle, and takes half the mental energy to sit through someone’s pain. It’s not apathy, nor is it sloth. This expression is the look of lower capacity when it tries to be helpful.

Most couples have never seen the pattern because they were looking for an explanation in his character rather than his Tuesday, but asking “What sort of day has he had, and does he have anything left in the tank?” is a lot more useful than asking “Why is he like this.” The same man can generate vastly different conversations depending on the answer.

3. The misses are called, the hits go unseen.

Third, basic cognitive bookkeeping is good for everyone.

Hard to recall the nights when he paid close attention. Nothing occurred. The talk didn’t leave any lasting impression, because it didn’t fulfill any unfulfilled need; you just said it, and he got it, and you moved on.

The times he jumped over fixing to really register it were because you left the discussion with an unspoken desire to say something. You can see that. After a few years of this experience, you’ll have a memory full of missed opportunities and hardly anything in the way of hits.

And then the stereotypical person comes along and gives you an easy way to explain the pattern you’ve seen. That is reassuring. In practice this is done by using a template over a partially filled record.

This is a real problem, and here is the proof. It probably happens less often than it seems, and the reason you got it is pretty dull.

Why it lands on him in the first place

Some background information is often overlooked, altering the entire interpretation of this discussion.

Pew’s research, which is based on a poll of more than 6,000 US adults, found that about 74 percent of those surveyed would turn to their spouse or partner for emotional support. Men and women were equally likely to say that. In every single case the spouse will be contacted first.

The line below is the image falling apart once you go. A few sources suggest that the difference between the willingness of men and women to turn to someone for help is 12 to 18 percentage points.

In simple terms, both of you should take the initiative to reach out to each other first. And behind it is different. A woman has confidantes in a mother, a sister, a close friend, and a fifteen-year-running group chat. In view of the male friendship recession over the last thirty years, it’s not uncommon for males to experience a very rapid decline after a relationship.

It’s worth sitting with this because it matters on both sides.

Your challenging day has come, and you see someone who may not have one place to put his own. If you start talking, there is no one else to tell this week, so everything that has not been said will stay in the room. And his capacity to absorb what you’re bringing is less than if the same burden were shared among four individuals.

The fix-it solution is unsatisfactory for several reasons. That does make it more readable. We’ve all known the experience of talking to a man who won’t listen. The person you’re talking to doesn’t realize this is important, and he’s the only person listening to you.

What is useful in real life

The usual advice is not to ask for help but simply to say that you want to be heard. This is better than nothing, but it sounds as if he should have read a signal that was never sent when it comes later as a correction.

There are four things that are much better.

1. In the first sentence say which one you prefer

And certainly not when things have gone wrong. Just when it begins.

I need five minutes to vent. I don’t need it solved; I just need to say it out loud.

The first two or three times, it is quite meaningless. It becomes part of the infrastructure of your home, like always putting your keys in the same bowl.

The main reason this works is that it totally eliminates guesswork, and most of these discussions fall apart because of it. He’s not ignoring a demand. He is doing nothing, the simplest way to approach a problem, because he has no particular instructions. There was never any reluctance to listen, so most guys have no trouble following directions. The desired result was not clear.

You can also use it in reverse. Some guys get cold feet after these conversations go badly enough. Saying

“I actually want your advice on this one”

stops them from wondering whether they’ll get negative feedback.

2. First, ensure the tank is full

His level of tension most affects the quality of his reaction. What happens in the thirty seconds leading up to your start is more important than anything that happens during.

Have you got capacity for this right now, or would it be better after dinner?”

What you get is the same really competent listener that the UCLA researchers saw when they weren’t stressed. Usually, waiting twenty minutes improves a bad conversation, even if neither party says anything different.

The researchers gave him the exact same advice. “The move works both ways; he wants to hear everything but needs half an hour beforehand. It doesn’t seem like avoidance because there is a promise to return, and a gradual change is easier than a sudden one.

3. Opt for a flatter style when you and your partner are experiencing a challenging day.

Both sides respond better to a cool, rational account of the facts rather than an emotional account under duress. If a man is already feeling pressure, the intensity that would normally bring him closer will only push him further away, and once he’s there, the conversation you were looking for will be impossible.

Be yourself and don’t let this become a directive to suppress your feelings. Timing Note. Begin with the flat model and allow him a few minutes to acquire the feel of it. When he’s ready to take it, the full version lands much better.

4. Instead of advice, identify the minimizing

And when they do go wrong, the offending statement is much more likely to be

it’s not that bad” than “you should just.”

Aim your criticism where it will do the best:

I don’t want it to be smaller. I want it to be heard

The line does anything except express the usual complaints. “You constantly try to fix things.” This phrase serves a dual purpose: it describes a character and invites further explanation. To say “I don’t need it to be smaller” is one action, at one instant. It can be changed without anyone having to give up anything about themselves.

If you are the one offering Solutions

You are not broken. And you are not doing what you think you are doing.

The reason why the answer pops up is because it seems to be the most practical option. To alleviate the pain, you experience when a loved one is facing difficulties, the most effective approach is to address the root cause of the issue. The generous impulse is directed at a target some fifteen degrees off.

Distress is not necessarily a request, and we often forget this. Sometimes it is important that someone you love or trust witness an event, but there is no benefit to witnessing it. It’s a strange, but teachable, concept if you’ve spent your life giving to others.

Two changes can have a significant impact.

Ask before you repair. There are just few words in “Do you want me to help with this, or do you want me to just listen?” Takes half a second to say, but once you ask it at the beginning, you fix the whole situation for good.

Pay closer attention to minimizing the condition rather than focusing on the recommendations. It’s dismissive from the outside to always tell a person that their condition isn’t that important, but it’s reassuring for them from the inside. Please make that change and keep everything else on this page as is. Saying

“that sounds genuinely rough” instead of “it’s not that bad”

fixes a surprising number of these off-topic discussions.

If you want a third, I’ll give you one. Some of the stress in these conversations is not from you or your spouse but from the fact that you are the only ones you have contact with. It’s not accidental that a man’s listening skills improve dramatically when he has three other people to talk to.

Do you want someone to listen to you or help you with this more?

Seven simple sentences and the whole problem is gone.

Common Questions

Impacts for the future

A common but unsubstantiated belief is that men are more likely to give answers than women. The first target for both sexes is the problem. Women tend to talk around it, which makes the advice gentler.

The real differences are more specific and practical than what is popularly thought. The real pain lies in the tendency of men to diminish their worth. Another reason for the frequency is that anxious men tend to run out of space quickly.

You can get those two to work. The wire story is subtly depressing because wiring is impossible to negotiate. There’s nothing wrong with saying to a man, “Hey, do you have 20 minutes? I want to be up front about my intentions.”

After 30 years, we have finally addressed the problem, albeit with a minor repair. This is the usual result when you present evidence and not a narrative.

See more in our Understanding Men section.

References

1. Goldsmith, D. J., & Dun, S. A. (1997). Sex differences and similarities in the
   communication of social support. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14(3), 317-337.
   
   
2. MacGeorge, E. L., et al. (2004). The myth of gender cultures: Similarities outweigh differences in men’s and women’s provision of and responses to supportive communication. Sex Roles, 50.
   
   
3. Goldsmith, D. J., & Fulfs, P. A. (1999). “You just don’t have the evidence”: An analysis of claims and evidence in Deborah Tannen’s You Just Don’t Understand. Communication Yearbook, 22, 1-49.
   
   
4. Neff, L. A., & Bradbury, T. N. Study of 189 couples on stress and emotional support provision, University of California, Los Angeles.
   
   
5. Pew Research Center (2025). Men, Women and Social Connections. Survey of 6,204 US adults, September 2024.
   
   
6. Gray, J. (1992). Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus. HarperCollins.
   
   
7. Tannen, D. (1990). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. William Morrow.