WomensStuff

There is a pseudo-scientific bullshit theory (that even has software tools available for it!) that purports that women and men communicate differently and thus can be identified by their writing style.

Masculine: Common stereotypes suggest that "masculine" writing is direct, assertive, action-focused, and uses more articles and concrete nouns.

Feminine: "Feminine" writing is said to be more personal, relational, emotional, and uses more pronouns and social words.

These ideas have deep roots in Western linguistic and literary criticism. Early 20th-century linguists like Otto Jespersen claimed women’s writing was less logical or innovative. Later studies found some statistical differences (sentence length, pronoun use), but these are small and often over-interpreted.

Basically it's sexist, non-scientific bullshit based on the typical problems of social "science" studies: too-small sample sets, often within a single culture and, indeed, a very specific small sub-culture (to wit: middle-class white American university students). Real studies by competent practitioners note that people can write in different voices depending on context, and that most "gendered" writing is cultural performance and conformance to norms around them. The notion of writing "like a woman" or "like a man" is mostly just a product of cultural stereotypes (and I'd go so far as to say white supremacist stereotypes) and, historically, pseudo-scientific thinking, all rooted in Western (or more specifically American) norms. While some statistical linguistic differences do actually exist, they are minor, context-dependent, and not inherently tied to gender.

The proper conclusion the data supports is that writing style is flexible, shaped by audience, purpose, and social context-not by biology or any essential "masculine" or "feminine" essence.