4.3.5 Solved Example - Socioculture II

This article was originally at www.bl.uk This is the text of the article as the website has removed it

Women in Public Speaking

Speaking in public has traditionally been an activity associated with men and not women. When we hear early recordings of women’s voices in public, they are generally of certain types of women and in particular white, upper-class women. This is because access to the public ‘ear’ is a privilege and therefore only held by the most powerful and influential in society. Historically, women have not had such power and they have effectively been barred from having their voices heard formally in public and professional arenas.

Where does this silencing of women in public come from? It is often attributed to a historical gendered split between public and private worlds. Men have traditionally held sway in the public spheres of law, politics, science and business. Women, however, have been confined to the private sphere and domestic concerns such as family and household activities.

Women were thought to be unsuited to the ‘manly’ world of work (possibly except for entertainment and the arts), and this set of underpinning prejudices against women’s professional abilities has its roots in earlier views. The 16th-century theologian John Knox believed that women were weak, foolish and incapable of wielding authority.[1] Such prejudices, although always contested by some, were still much in evidence at the beginning of the 20th century. For example, the Danish linguist Otto Jespersen declared that women had a much-diminished capacity for language when compared to men, and that their ability to read quickly could be attributed to the ‘vacant chambers’ of their minds: they were unable to think clearly or deeply and so quickly skimmed over the surface of the meanings of language.

Aside from such direct prejudice, the separation of public and private worlds for men and women also meant that women’s language, linked to their domestic concerns and endeavours, was often more subtly undervalued. Men’s public talk was important, but women’s talk was regarded as ‘chatting’ or ‘gossiping’ because it was deemed to be trivial in the eyes of men. However, from a contemporary perspective, it is precisely these women’s voices that can give us valuable first-hand accounts of historical events and of social and domestic settings.

On the other hand, men’s voices are routinely and automatically associated with public authority, be it in science, politics, law or religion. This is a tradition that stretches back to ancient times when the act of public speaking itself defined masculinity.

It is this deeply entrenched association that continues to present women with obstacles when speaking in public and workplace situations today. It is normal for men to tell others what to do, but when women wield this authority it may be considered unfeminine and lead to negative judgements about being ‘bossy’ or ‘pushy’. For many women, speaking with authority must be managed carefully, for example by presenting orders as if they are requests, to avoid these negative, gender-based judgements.

These beliefs about what ‘normal’ communication is for men and women rest on another core idea about gender: that men and women are fundamentally different. With respect to speech, a deeply held belief is that women speak with a ‘different voice’ from men. Women supposedly speak in co-operative, consensual ways and men speak in confrontational, direct styles. In fact, there is no evidence for this. Research has shown that there are many more similarities between men and women’s speech than these stereotypes would suggest. Women and men are actually equally confrontational or consensual depending on what the professional context demands in terms of speech.[4]

What does differ is how women are judged for speaking with authority, which gives rise to a series of ‘double binds’ for women in public life. For example, perceived ‘female’ characteristics such as being easily influenced, emotional and illogical are at odds with the perceived ‘masculine’ qualities of maturity and competence required of public figures. If a woman leader displays any emotion she is often judged as weak, but then if she does not show enough emotion she is judged negatively for behaving counter-stereotypically and in a way that lacks femininity. This puts her in a no-win situation.

Speaking in public therefore still poses problems for women. Even young girls who speak out, such as the climate activist Greta Thunberg, are criticized for their public speaking style

Women are also still criticized for entering what are deemed to be male public spaces. This is typified by the hostile reaction to Vicki Sparks, the first woman to provide commentary on a men’s World Cup football match on UK television in 2018. Sparks’s voice was described as ‘squeaky’, a common complaint about women speaking in previously all-male contexts, and her sporting knowledge and ability to provide commentary was also questioned. It seems that whether speaking out for women as a suffragette, like Christabel Pankhurst in 1908 or these more contemporary disruptions caused by Greta Thunberg, Vicki Sparks and others like them, women in public life must carry these additional burdens of criticism that are not directed at their male counterparts with anything like the same degree of vitriol and violence. It is only because they continue to speak out that women’s voices may gradually become judged not for their failings but for the wisdom and authority of the messages that they carry.

Author's PoV

Typically, women were not able to become public speakers because
1. Public speaking was possible only for powerful & influential people
2. Historically, men have been in the public sphere whereas women have been confined to household and family work
3. Men were prejudiced against women and thought of them as weak, foolish, and having a lower capacity for language or understanding. Women’s talk was considered to be less important (chatting or gossip).
4. People have this false belief about how men and women work - they think that men are direct and confrontational but women are cooperative (which is wrong).

Men’s voices have been associated with public speaking. As a result of this, women are facing challenges while speaking in public or at work:
1. Men can be authoritative, but people can form a negative opinion if women behave the same way
2. Men also feel that women are emotional and illogical, and hence, not suited for work/public speaking. But even if women end up displaying the so-called masculine qualities, men still form a negative impression (bossy, unfeminine).

Women who are public speakers (activists or sports commentators) have been (and still are being) criticised severely. This can change if women continue to speak up despite facing criticism.