I recently had the opportunity to sit down with Danielle Bayard Jackson, author of Fighting for Our Friendships: The Science and Art of Conflict and Connection in Women’s Relationships, to talk about her book. I learned so much in our discussion and I’m excited to share it with you all. 

Dr. Marisa G. Franco (MF): Your book is incredible. It’s really insightful, especially because it delves into the intersection of gender and friendships, which isn’t often explored. Can you share more about why women’s friendships are unique?

Danielle Bayard Jackson (DBJ): Thank you so much, I’m thrilled you enjoyed the book. I began noticing these differences back when I was a high school teacher. The way girls and guys congregate and react to certain situations showed me our unique ways of bonding and conflict resolution. It struck me that what may disrupt girls might not even register with the boys. These observations continued into adulthood, confirming my suspicions. Through my own experiences and conversations with other women, I became increasingly curious about our distinct modes of communication and cooperation. 

MF: bell hooks pointed out that fear of direct confrontation can push us toward indirect methods like gossip because it serves as an alternative when addressing issues directly seems too risky due to potential consequences. Have you heard that?

DBJ: Absolutely. While we may outwardly denounce gossip, it does fulfill a basic sociological need by helping us navigate social dynamics. Deborah Tannen is a sociolinguist who says to ask yourself, “am I talking about or am I talking against?”  which highlights a crucial distinction. Am I talking about my friend because I’m trying to process my feelings? Or am I secretly taking delight in having you perceive her negatively?

MF: I feel like that is a great thing to keep in mind, because I think some people think if you’re talking about me behind my back, it’s automatically bad. But, viewing gossip as a tool for processing emotions rather than inherently negative can shift our understanding of its role in friendships.

Your book brilliantly explores this conundrum of women’s friendships—that while on one hand they tend to be more intimate than men’s friendships, but on the other hand they are more fragile. Why do you think this combination exists?

DBJ: I think it comes down to the expectations we place on our close relationships. Research suggests that women have higher expectations of support and intimacy in their close relationships than men do. Women integrate our friends into our lives as deeply as siblings, whereas men treat their friends more like cousins.

With such high expectations, even minor conflicts can feel like major violations. I know I’m generalizing here, but, we tend to know that men aren’t as intimately interwoven, that maybe they don’t see and hang out with each other as often [as women do]. 

MF: Is there a way to achieve intimacy without fragility? And what does that look like?

DBJ: I believe our relationship with conflict holds the key. Unlike other contexts where conflict is expected we often don’t anticipate it in friendships. If your attitude toward friendship itself is that friendship is supposed to be recreational and fun then conflict is going to feel inappropriate to your objectives for friendship. Changing our perception of conflict from a sign of impending doom to an opportunity for growth can strengthen our friendships. 

MF: Yeah, absolutely. I think I’m a recovering conflict avoidant and I will say, I think people avoid conflict because they think it has to look like attacking each other. It has to look like antagonism. So I totally agree with you that it’s us understanding that conflict can be defanged, that it doesn’t have to be even raised voices. It can feel like an act of love.

But you have this really great concept of the “three affinities of female friendship” for why conflict tends to happen in women’s friendships. Tell us about it.

DBJ: Of course! The three affinities—symmetry, support, and secrecy—are central to understanding women’s friendships. These qualities, while fostering intimacy, also make these friendships more susceptible to disruption when violated. So women prioritize symmetry, that feeling of girl, you’re like me. You get it; support– because the research says that the number one thing women look for in their same-sex friendships is emotional support; and then secrecy which is this feeling of you and I are exclusive. We’re in this vault together. And I’m not saying that men don’t value these things, but women highly prioritize these things.  

Recognizing these affinities provides a framework for identifying and addressing issues within friendships. I’m able to name, you know, when she criticizes me or when she’s judgmental of my parenting choices or my eating choices, it feels like she’s elevating herself, because criticizing me is you saying, your choices are superior to mine. And so what’s happening here is that I feel like she thinks she’s better than me. 

MF: It’s fascinating how these affinities shape the dynamics of female friendships and understanding them can help navigate conflicts more effectively. Because typically when it comes to conflict in friendship, we don’t make the unsaid said. It can just feel like “there’s something off, but I can’t really tell what it is.” And it just continues to build and accumulate. It’s helpful to have that framework to ask yourself, “I don’t know what’s off, but is it symmetry? Is it support? Is it secrecy?” It gives us a little bit of an audit in those situations.

If you’ve enjoyed this snippet of our conversation, I encourage you to pick up Danielle’s new book Fighting for Our Friendships: The Science and Art of Conflict and Connection in Women’s Relationships. The book is out today and offers a refreshing exploration of the intricacies of female friendships. 

Thank you to Danielle for sitting down with me to talk and I encourage you all to follow her work.