3 things women say that weaken the power of their words.

If we're to believe the self-help aisle of every '90s bookstore, men and women talk and act so differently because we're really from two opposing planets.

While that's not factually accurate, there's no denying that men and women have unique communication styles, and that disparity can make things challenging for women looking to get ahead in careers still dominated by male voices. 

But when the first female presidential nominee for a major political party addresses the nation to describe her vision for America, only to be met by pundits dissecting her smile and her "shrill" tone instead of her proposed policies — it’s clear that words really matter. Not simply because we’re women, but especially because we’re women.


So, what makes language explicitly "female"?

Ask a linguist and they'll tell you that women's language is generally more expressive and emotional. Women learn to speak earlier and with greater complexity. We're more likely to use dramatic punctuation or emojis to help us get our point across. We're also especially likely to use words and phrases that soften an opinion or gently undermine a point in order to make others feel more comfortable.

That is particularly important because these language choices are not accidental. We live in a culture that values female voices more when they reflect traditional "lady" characteristics of humility, likability, and politeness above all. 

Others who've written about this topic have addressed more reasons why women might avoid using stronger language. Jezebel's Tracy Moore wrote about the reality of a male-dominated society where women live with the "the ever-present background fear of being perceived as a nag." Author Tara Mohr acknowledged that for centuries, "women did not have the political and human rights to protect our safety if we spoke up and threatened or angered those around us."

All of those are true and fair. But at the same time, they're holding us back.

It is 2016. If women can fight and die for a country; if we can bust ghosts and glass ceilings; if we can raise our voices for intersectional equality and fair, equal wages; then we are more than ready to match the way we communicate with this moment in history.

Here are the three biggest verbal tics women use that can make language lose its power:

Sorry, but we're just saying "just" and "sorry" too much.

Rosa Parks used powerful action and words to ignite the fire of the U.S. civil rights movement. Sadly, her memorable words lose a little something when they're coupled with two of the most common words in female language: "just" and "sorry."

Saying "sorry" when it isn't necessary is so common that a shampoo company made an ad about it. But researchers say using the word risks taking responsibility for faults and actions that aren’t our own — or aren’t even faults. Being mindful of when we apologize (and where and how) is good advice regardless of gender or workplace.

The use of "just" is a little more complicated. Some women, like former Google executive Ellen Leanse, believe that adding "just" to statements gives other people more authority and control and makes the speaker seem defensive. 

As she wrote on her blog

"It hit me that there was something about the word I didn’t like. It was a 'permission' word, in a way — a warm-up to a request, an apology for interrupting, a shy knock on a door before asking, 'Can I get something I need from you?'"

Others argue that "just" can be used effectively as a way to give importance to a certain word, like the famed Nike slogan "Just do it." Though, to be fair, that famous statement wasn't written by — or inspired by — a woman.

Self-deprecating phrases can make us seem less smart.

Laurel Thatcher Ulrich has enough problems with people misattributing her most famous quote to other people; she doesn't need the power of her words diminished.

Using qualifiers that lessen female authority to make strong statements, like "I'm not an expert" or "You've worked on this longer than I have," are a common way that women couch their statements when they're afraid of offending others. 

Unfortunately, this can have the unintended effect of making a female speaker seem less credible and her ideas less worthy.

Being overly cautious can unintentionally undermine us.

It's very easy to end a statement, presentation, or even an email with a qualifying statement like "Do you know what I mean?" or "Am I making sense?" These phrases are subtle underminers, making it seem that women don't have faith in their own ideas and are asking for approval for them. 

Phrases like "What do you think?" or "Looking forward to your comments or questions" are a better way to make the same point.

Let's be real: If a woman wants to keep these words and phrases in her vocabulary, she is more than welcome to do so.

There are perfectly good reasons why someone would choose to soften language and make it more friendly. Maybe it helps move things forward with someone difficult. Maybe they've already been told — as too many working women have — that talking more like a man at work was making them seem "judgmental" or overly negative. Maybe they simply like using them — and, seriously, who are any of us to tell anyone else what they can and cannot say?

But in a world where women have fought so hard for what we have and still have so much further to go, being aware of the unintended implications of our language isn't a bad idea. 

Especially if it helps women eventually prove that the way we say things doesn’t matter nearly as much as what we’re saying.

via KrustyKhajiit / YouTube

Thomas F. Wilson played one of the most recognizable villains in film history, Biff Tannen, in the "Back to the Future" series. So, understandably, he gets recognized wherever he goes for the iconic role.

The attention must be nice, but it has to get exhausting answering the same questions day in and day out about the films. So Wilson created a card that he carries with him to hand out to people that answers all the questions he gets asked on a daily basis.

Keep Reading Show less
Courtesy of FIELDTRIP
True

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected diverse communities due largely in part to social factors such as inadequate access to housing, income, dietary options, education and employment — all of which have been shown to affect people's physical health.

Recognizing that inequity, Harlem-based chef JJ Johnson sought out to help his community maximize its health during the pandemic — one grain at a time.

Johnson manages FIELDTRIP, a health-focused restaurant that strives to bring people together through the celebration of rice, a grain found in cuisines of countless cultures.

"It was very important for me to show the world that places like Harlem want access to more health-conscious foods," Johnson said. "The people who live in Harlem should have the option to eat fresh, locally farmed and delicious food that other communities have access to."

Lack of education and access to those healthy food options is a primary driver of why 31% of adults in Harlem are struggling with obesity — the highest rate of any neighborhood in New York City and 7% higher than the average adult obesity rate across the five boroughs.

Obesity increases risk for heart disease or diabetes, which in turn leaves Harlem's residents — who are 76% Black or LatinX — at heightened risk for complications with COVID-19.

Keep Reading Show less

Sometimes a politician says or does something so brazenly gross that you have to do a double take to make sure it really happened. Take, for instance, this tweet from Lauren Witzke, a GOP candidate for the U.S. Senate from Delaware. Witzke defeated the party's endorsed candidate to win the primary, has been photographed in a QAnon t-shirt, supports the conspiracy theory that 9/11 was a U.S. government inside operation, and has called herself a flat earther.

So that's neat.

Witzke has also proposed a 10-year total halt on immigration to the U.S., which is absurd on its face, but makes sense when you see what she believes about immigrants. In a tweet this week, Witzke wrote, "Most third-world migrants can not assimilate into civil societies. Prove me wrong."

First, let's talk about how "civil societies" and developing nations are not different things, and to imply that they are is racist, xenophobic, and wrong. Not to mention, it has never been a thing to refer people using terms like "third-world." That's a somewhat outdated term for developing nations, and it was never an adjective to describe people from those nations even when it was in use.

Next, let's see how Twitter thwapped Lauren Witzke straight into the 21st century by proving her wrong in the most delicious way. Not only did people share how they or their relatives and friends have successfully "assimilated," but many showed that they went way, way beyond that.

Keep Reading Show less
via WatchMojo / YouTube

There are two conflicting viewpoints when it comes to addressing culture from that past that contains offensive elements that would never be acceptable today.

Some believe that old films, TV shows, music or books with out-of-date, offensive elements should be hidden from public view. While others think they should be used as valuable tools that help us learn from the past.

Keep Reading Show less