Muted group theory (MGT)
Muted Group Theory (MGT) is a communication theory that explores the relationship between language, power, and gender, highlighting how societal structures, particularly patriarchal systems, impact communication dynamics. Originating from the work of British social anthropologist Edwin Ardener, MGT posits that in societies where men predominantly shape language and define norms, women and other marginalized groups often find their voices diminished or "muted." This phenomenon stems from the historical male-centric construction of language, which can obstruct women from fully expressing their experiences and ideas.
MGT extends beyond gender, applying to various marginalized groups experiencing power differentials based on race, class, religion, or sexuality. The theory raises critical questions about how language shapes societal perceptions and the ways in which marginalized individuals navigate communication challenges. Critics of MGT argue that it may overly generalize findings from specific cultures to broader contexts and may not account for the complexities of multiple social hierarchies. Nevertheless, the implications of muted group theory are significant, influencing discussions in fields such as feminist communication, legal contexts, and social justice. Overall, MGT serves as a lens through which to examine the intersections of power, language, and identity in communication.
On this Page
Muted group theory (MGT)
"Muted group theory," or MGT, refers to a controversial communications theory about the nature of communication and its relationship to gender. Communication theorists have noted significant differences in the understanding of words between genders, which speaks directly to the ability of a person to share their ideas, opinions, experiences, and perceptions with members of the opposite gender and to comprehend the expressions made by the other gender. Moreover, in patriarchal societies, where men have long occupied positions of authority and have determined the accepted definition of words and modes of expression, women find themselves excluded from or thwarted in communication. Thus, women are left a "muted" group. MGT has also been extended to other socially marginalized groups.
Overview
The theory of a muted group originated in the writings of British social anthropologist Edwin Ardener (1927-1987) in connection with his work in the 1940s among the Bakweri and Esu peoples in Cameroon and the organization of power within those closed societies. More specifically, Ardener was fascinated by the inequities in power and, in this case, how gender determined authority. Both societies were profoundly patriarchal (that is, dominated by men).
In the early 1970s, however, Ardener and his wife, fellow anthropologist Shirley Ardener, considerably expanded the scope of his theoretical work by positing that men’s and women’s perceptions and experiences differ widely as an outgrowth of the gendered division of labor and that because for ages, men had shaped and directed societies, inevitably a manifestation of that male authority came through language. According to functional linguistics, that male-centric language then shapes the society’s perceptions of reality. The logical extension of the Ardeners’ theory of power and communication is that women are unable to voice their own experiences or ideas completely, their voices suppressed because language itself came into being largely at the direction of men and reflects male experience.
Impact
Appearing on the cusp of the women’s liberation movement of the 1970s and 1980s, the Ardeners’ theory raised significant questions about how exactly to address the inequities between the genders and, in turn, how to empower women. According to later theorists, given the gendered nature of language, women have few choices: to "translate" their thoughts, feelings, and ideas into male-centric terms; to attempt to express themselves on their own terms and risk not being heard or understood; or to remain silent. Not only is the content of women’s speech or expression circumscribed, according to MGT, but so are the timing, place, rationale, and consequence. Indeed, silence among women has itself been controversial, with many feminists seeing silence as an obstacle to overcome and others considering it a legitimate option to be exercised. Communications studies conducted in the 1980s and 1990s also found that common, often negative perceptions of women’s talkativeness did not correspond to the actual amounts of speech and silence among the genders. This was particularly true in mixed-gender public spaces, such as in classrooms and in the workplace.
The related concepts of mutedness and silencing have potential ramifications across society. For instance, in the legal system, the theory could affect a wide range of thorny and highly sensitive issues, from sexual harassment in the workplace to prenuptial agreements, from the wording of business contracts to the language routinely used in network communication. Moreover, researcher and theorist Cheris Kramarae argues that men struggle more to understand what women mean than vice versa, women are more dissatisfied with public discourse, and the words and expressions created by women are less likely to gain widespread adoption across genders.
It is worth noting that MGT is not tied to biological sex but to social and cultural power. Consequently, the concept of the muted group has also been applied to other situations where a power differential exists in a relationship, such as between members of different races and ethnicities, social classes, religions, or sexualities. This idea forms the foundation for co-cultural theorizing, which examines interactions between dominant groups and subordinate groups.
Criticisms of MGT range widely in nature and have often arisen from within feminist communications scholarship itself. Communications scholars Celia Wall and Pat Gannon-Leary point out that the Ardeners generalized their findings from specific isolated cultural groups to the world at large and question the applicability of those findings and conclusions beyond the groups in which they originate. Others, such as Kramarae, have argued that the theory can be overly dualistic and does not adequately address multiple social hierarchies and issues of voice on a global scale. Datedness is another critique that is sometimes leveled at MGT, as women have made advances in many areas of society since the theory was first formulated. Further, as the definitions of gender have evolved into the mid-2020s, MGT has been adapted. For example, as alternative gender identifies, such as non-binary or gender-fluid, become more recognized, there has been a struggle to introduce gender-inclusive language and have it accepted by some in mainstream society. A specific example of this is the use of pronouns. Those who push back are seen a dominant group attempting to control discourse.
Bibliography
Ardener, Edwin. "Belief and the Problem of Women and the 'Problem' Revisited." Feminist Anthropology: A Reader, edited by Ellen Lewin, Wiley, 2006, pp. 47-65.
Barkman, Linda Lee Smith. “Muted Group Theory: A Tool for Hearing Marginalized Voices.” CBE International, 31 Oct. 2018, www.cbeinternational.org/resource/muted-group-theory-tool-hearing-marginalized-voices/. Accessed 3 Feb. 2025.
"Do You Speak American? Language as Prejudice." PBS, www.pbs.org/speak/speech/prejudice/women. Accessed 3 Feb. 2025.
Glenister Roberts, Kathleen, editor. Communication Theory and Millennial Popular Culture: Essays and Applications. 2nd ed., Peter Lang, 2016.
Kramarae, Cheris. "Muted Group Theory and Communication: Asking Dangerous Questions." Women and Language, vol. 28, no. 2, 2005, pp. 55-61.
Orbe, Mark P., and Tabatha L. Roberts. "Co-Cultural Theorizing: Foundations, Applications & Extensions." Howard Journal of Communications, vol. 23, no. 4, 2012, pp. 293-311.
Palomares, Nicholas A. "Language and Gender." The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication, edited by Charles R. Berger and Michael E. Roloff, Wiley, 2016.
Wall, Celia J., and Pat Gannon-Leary. "A Sentence Made by Men: Muted Group Theory Revisited." European Journal of Women's Studies, vol. 6, no. 1, 1999, pp. 21-29.