There is a good Great Courses on linguistics where the teacher talks about how the Valkey Speak stuff is a way of softening your opinion to make it more likely to be heard. I thought it was an interesting take. I do a lot of the Valley Speak stuff and always wondered why this trend stuck around so long. At the time it seemed so momentary. I thought it was a great explanation.
3 Likes
The thesis is that when women talk, their speech is belittled, not because of what they say, but because of how they say it and who is saying it.
Supporting example quotes, only from men - no scratch that - from arseholes who happen to be men are given as evidence/signs of this phenomenon even though, just a few sentences later, we’re told that it’s women who do the dissing. Sigh.
When the men do it, they’re been arseholes or more plainly ‘men’. But when the women do it, it “reflects their own anxiety and self-criticism.” I supposed, then it’s not their fault. Of course, it’s funny/empowering when a female TV show character yells at a male character to ‘grow a pair’!
That’s because little boys deserved being punished more often than little girls, they do get punished more often than girls, and they get punished more harshly than…well, you get the picture. Of course, some folk here will tell them to ‘grow a pair’.
Even in D Tannen’s The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why, I came across this line: In the social structure of the peer groups in which they grow up, boys are indeed looking for opportunities to put others down and take the one-up position for themselves.
I gathered that this was the case from my long in-depth study of American power structure in the workplace which I did by from watching American cop shows, the cops never, never, ever say ‘please’ or ‘thank you’? (Notable exception: ‘Castle’, but for obvious reasons.)
Professor Tanner, quite credibly, claims that this policy of never greasing the gears of life with some social niceties is really reflective of how the majority of boys grow up in the 'States.
Maybe the problem isn’t the men’s and women’s attitude vis-à-vis or reaction to women talking, and whether (some) men need to be spanked. Maybe the problem is some men’s and some women’s attitude.
At least in this particular instance, the real problem just might be American society’s insistence of generously rewarding of arseholes like Trump and Beck, and of rewarding people who are wrong - over and over and over, along with the general American attitudes towards women and all other people.
/Edited (multiple times!) to better reflect what I wanted to say.
//Now on to the slings and arrows!
2 Likes
You’re missing an important part: women’s speech is more likely than men’s to be criticized on the grounds of how they speak.
That’s only relevant if women are not also capable of sexism. in fact, women are capable of sexism (it would be sexist to suggest otherwise). Criticism of sexist attitudes seems worthwhile whether it’s men or women displaying those attitudes.
I think this is a straw man. No one has explicitly said “by their very natures, men are bad and women are good” here. Nothing like it.
Most of what you say doesn’t even seem remotely salient to the thesis being discussed, though – you seem a little like you’re ranting.
How is this a contradiction? Some men and some women have sexist attitudes. They’re prone to taking what women say less seriously, and justify that attitude on the basis of irrelevant details about women’s vocal patterns.
But only some people reward arseholes like Trump and Beck, so isn’t your argument vulnerable to the same (invalid, in my perspective) criticism you are leveling at the OP? The problem isn’t that society rewards arseholes like Trump and Beck, but that some men and some women do. Again, I don’t see how this argument actually does anything, but you seem to, so…
Are you trying to say that “general American attitudes” towards “all other people” are the same as 'general American attitudes" towards women? I don’t really agree…first of all, I’m not sure how to interpret “general American attitudes” as there are a hell of a lot of American with all different sorts of attitudes towards different people. But also, I think sexism and misogyny are real demonstrable features of US culture (and pretty much every other culture as well).
This sort of thing is unlikely to deter flamers, but does put off people (like me) who would like to try to take your perspective seriously and learn from it.
9 Likes
(I should’ve mentioned this was 4 years ago; doesn’t seem that long to me but maybe the voices had changed)
Can’t have women giving advice or telling a Saudi-prince what to do. 
2 Likes
I actually came back here to change that line (too late, then) to just “attitudes”… I had just remembered Strauss-Kahn’s and Berlusconi’s vile histories.
Actually, this is what triggered my original comment: as I understood the sentence, the women were somewhat excused for the bad nature, while the men were punished.
2 Likes
"In the social structure of the peer groups in which they grow up, boys are indeed looking for opportunities to put others down and take them.
Professor Tanner, quite credibly, claims that this policy of never greasing the gears of life with some social niceties is really reflective of how the majority of boys grow up in the 'States."
What you are describing here is Patriarchy. Boys, and eventually some men in a constant struggle to prove and maintain traditional masculinity.
Consider that the biggest insults for boys engaged in this struggle are feminine. Pussy, bitch, panty-waist, et al. The underlying and unconcious belief here is that the feminine is weak, to be avoided, reviled.
Because of strict gender roles boys are expected to be tougher than girls and are encouraged to “grow a pair” so they engage in behaviors that many girls might have engaged in, had they not been socialized to be demure, sweet, and “nice”.
At the bottom of it we all internalize some of this hierarchy as children. And then we become adults who have trouble taking women seriously when they speak in a way that is feminine, and then conflicted when they speak in a traditionally “masculine” fashion.
10 Likes
Thank you for the link. I occasionally listen to Radiolab but the style does not appeal to me. It’s the audio equivalent of the video jump cut - which annoys me greatly.
Interesting note: every one of the speakers in the story had noticeable vocal fry - even the kid who is the primary subject.
1 Like
You sure about that?
12 Likes
“Punished” how? By being criticized in an article that only a tiny percentage of men will ever read, most of whom already agree with its thesis?
Maybe you should just try to state succinctly what you’re objecting to, because your comments so far are all over the map and it’s hard to pin down what you’re trying to argue.
I do think you’re objecting to a factual description because you’re interpreting it as a morally normative argument.
4 Likes
Bingo.
We are all products of the culture we are raised in. It takes effort to be aware of the constant messaging in all our media and to actively fight against it. Pointing out that this hierarchy is a “thing” should not be controversial, its literally the first step in correcting an unfair system! And yet here we are, arguing about it… because some people don’t like the sound of a specific verbal tic… that is not actually the conversation at hand! BAH! Friday night cannot come fast enough!
14 Likes
Petulant PC meet reality. If you really believe that a bright 24 year old black young man with an Ivy MBA who speaks and dresses like a gangsta rapper would be hired by an investment bank, I’ve got a bridge to sell you. Honestly, there was a time at some banks when talking like white Brooklyn thug was accepted, but not anymore. And even then they had to dress the part. Businesses have cultures, and when in Rome, or Google, or Goldman Sachs…
Normative english is the one that no one can place where you’re from easily. I’m from Long Island NY, but I don’t have an LI accent, nor a distinctively NY area accent. I know plenty of Westerners and Southerners with no distinct accent. And we’re just talking accent, not distinctive grammar. Every OH or Western PA person I know quickly loses the habit of not using “to be” in a sentence like “this room needs cleaned”.
I know you hate it, but in this point of history having a strong accent has strong class implications. You rarely hear a major businessperson with a regional domestic accent that came up through the ranks rather than as an entrepreneur.
Wishing it were not so does not make it not so.
Back to female issues, I don’t agree that women’s voices are boxed in by fry, uptalk or nasal. I know plenty of powerful women who have none of the above. I think they’re simply cultural, doing what your friends do. My wife has described being a young looking 24 year old with a high voice running a men’s homeless shelter, and deliberately lowering her voice for gravitas. But she does not fry.
1 Like
I asked you not to answer the questions to avoid dragging the thread off-topic. I’ll PM you in response.
2 Likes
I wouldn’t call the fact that boys are punished more and more harshly than girls are a patriarchy. Result of? Maybe.
The examples that women are judged harshly/incorrectly because of their speech patterns quoted men.** The article points out that women do it more often than the men do (then why not quote women?). Is it, somehow, men’s fault? The women aren’t being hypocritical, they’re just victims.
** Two men that I don’t consider ‘real’ men, but, apparently, a lot of people DO, some women included. And they sure seem to be able to reproduce, eh.
Again, you seem to be mistaking a factual observation for a morally normative argument.
No one is “blaming” men (though they may be suggesting that men can do better). No one is “excusing” women (though they may be trying to explain why women would display the same attitudes as some men).
1 Like
Yep, I’m sure. Quoting from that same article you linked to:
“Overall, black boys are more likely to be suspended than any group, at 20 percent.”
and:
Please note that for every racial group in the chart, the boys’ rates of suspension are pretty much double the girls’ rates.
Misleading headline is misleading: (Some) Black girls suspended at higher rates than most boys.
Well, duh!
4 Likes
The way that boys are socialized to treat each other and to regard women as lower in the hierarchy is patriarchy.
Harsh treatment and discouraging the display of emotions and traditionally feminine traits in boys is a result of patriarchy, as is both men and women’s policing of women’s voices and tone over what women are actually saying
7 Likes
Ok fine, headline is clickbait… but, what is your point? That young boys are punished more than young girls ergo grown men don’t like listening to grown women’s voices?
This feels egregiously off topic at this point. If you want to talk about the gender injustice in classroom discipline maybe start a thread for that? THIS thread is about how women’s voices are silenced.
11 Likes
When I was going for my pilot’s license, the subject of air traffic controllers and their voices came up. One school of thought prefers the flat midwestern US accent as being easiest to understand for pilots from around the world, having minimal regional alteration from standard English. Part of the reason that they say ‘niner’ rather than ‘nine’ is because they do not want to confuse German-speaking pilots who might mistake if for ‘nein’, a Germanic ‘no’ (which seems a fairly spurious distinction to me). It was also noted that for a while pilots mimicked, either deliberately or accidentally, the Texas drawl that was characteristic of ‘hot test pilots’, many of whom trained in bases in that area.
All this is hearsay, and YMMV.
1 Like
