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

Words matter. Even when they shouldn't.

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.

Family


Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is a name you should remember. If you don't follow politics closely, remember his name because he's the first Republican in Congress to openly join the call for a renewed federal ban on assault weapons.

If you're a Democrat or a diehard progressive partisan, remember his name because it's proof that as a nation we can put principles before party and walk across the political aisle to get things done.

If you're a Republican, remember his name as evidence that real leadership in politics sometimes means risking your reputation to do what is right even when most of your colleagues disagree or lack the political courage to go first.

But let's allow Rep. King to explain himself in his own words:

Keep Reading Show less
Democracy
via PixaBay

Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang has brought a lot of attention to the idea of implementing a universal basic income on America. His "freedom dividend" would pay every American $1,000 a month to spend as they choose.

In addition to helping Americans deal with a future in which the labor market will be upended by automation, this basic income could allow Americans to rethink what we see as work and nurture what Yang calls a "human-centered" economy.

Keep Reading Show less
Family

Patagonia has taken "family-friendly workplace" to a whole new level, and people are noticing.

The outdoor clothing and gear company has made a name for itself by putting its money where its mouth is. From creating backpacks out of 100% recycled materials to donating their $10 million tax cut to fight climate change to refusing to sell to clients who harm the environment, Patagonia leads by example.

That dedication to principle is clear in its policies for parents who work for them, as evidenced by a viral post from Holly Morisette, a recruiter at Patagonia.

Keep Reading Show less
Family
Photo by Bruce Mars on Unsplash

Returning to school after summer break meant the return of classes and new lockers, but for me it also meant heading back to basketball practice. I can't say I remember most games or practices, but certain memories still stick in my mind — and some don't even have to do with basketball at all. Like the time I was sitting on the gym floor one day before practice, lacing up my shoes, when an assistant coach on the boy's team came over to me. "Did you lose weight this summer?" he asked. "Were you trying to?" I was 15.

My teenage years, like many people's, were a time when my appearance occupied my thoughts more than almost anything else. The idea of being thinner or smaller was always appealing to me then, no matter what size I was. Given this, the idea of someone — anyone — thinking I looked smaller should have been appealing to me, but when this coach asked me that question, I remember feeling hot with an immediate wave of embarrassment. "How big had I been last year? Did I not look OK then? Maybe I should have worked out more."

The real answer to his question was that I had spent most of the summer playing competitive basketball, working out for three or four hours a day, four days a week. I hadn't really had time to focus on weight loss at all, but I guess it had happened. Suddenly, though, I was feeling like maybe I should have been more focused on it. If this person, a grown adult, had recognized that I was smaller, then obviously he recognized I was bigger before. I had room to improve, clearly, and I still had room to improve. It would be another decade before I finally learned to be content as is.

Keep Reading Show less
Culture