Women face the brunt of these judgments about language, and they occur primarily due to two linguistic patterns: uptalk and vocal fry. Although both strategies are used by men and women, cultural conditioning has increasingly framed them as signs that women are less serious, less knowledgeable, and more prone to error—simply because of the natural ways they speak.
Are You Familiar With Uptalk?
If you’ve ever been in a conversation (which applies to everyone), you’ve heard uptalk. While some sources state that uptalk finally became noticeable in the 1950s, it’s likely been around for a lot longer. Uptalk refers to the tendency to increase pitch at the end of a sentence, just as you would when asking a question. However, uptalk need not be a question; instead, it is a declarative sentence stated with a question tone.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the type of speech known as the “Valley Girl” accent. This English phenomenon is easily recognizable and has become a cultural stereotype. You can likely hear the intonation in the following sentence when spoken aloud, even though you’re just reading it:
“Like, oh my God, so Jessica went to college, and…”
Most people would be familiar enough with Valley Girl speech that they would recognize the rising tone on “God” and “college.” Even though this sentence is not a question, the rising intonation makes it sound like it is. That’s the definition of uptalk.
However, uptalk serves a practical function. It opens the floor for contributions from others without directly asking (e.g., inviting a person to correct you when saying, “So my paper is due at 9…”). It also manages the flow and tone of conversation as an engagement between two or more people.
The Strain of Vocal Fry
Vocal fry describes the phenomenon in which a person’s voice becomes creaky and lower-pitched, often at the end of utterances. The Kardashians are famous for this, but its origins trace back to the 1930s, when it was first acknowledged. However, it took another 30 years before it was ever studied as a linguistic phenomenon.
Vocal fry sentences often take the inverse form of uptalk, beginning high or flat and intoning downward. The velocity of the breath decreases, reducing the amount of force pushed through the vocal cords. Whereas normal speech pushes the vocal cords apart so they no longer touch, vocal fry arises when there’s not enough pressure to do so, causing the cords to vibrate together and create a crunchier, rougher sound. It is especially noticeable on longer or held sounds, such as “Oh my gaaaaahd” (slang), in which the voice retreats toward the back of the throat.
Is Language Sexist?
Patriarchal norms have identified linguistic elements at which women are more efficient or prone and categorized them as feminine-only. In other words, people have taken certain ways of speaking and put them in the “women” bucket. Then, they apply their preconceptions and subconscious biases against those linguistic features; they may believe certain language markers are less serious, inferior, or just plain irritating.
Thus, because those linguistic elements are in the “women” bucket as “the way women speak,” women’s thoughts and utterances are, in turn, considered inferior, irritating, or less serious compared to men’s. This tendency entirely disregards the reality that people of all sorts of cultures, ages, and genders use these methods of speaking. Yes, men use vocal fry. Yes, your brother, father, or “masculine” friend has probably relied on uptalk. It simply goes unnoticed when someone other than a woman does so.
What does this mean for women?
Vocal fry tends to invoke feelings of irritation or a perception that women are inferior. Why?
- Vocal fry drops the tone of the voice into a more masculine range. This has been correlated in studies with a decrease in the perceived attractiveness and intelligence of female participants, likely because the woman has deviated from a “feminine” presentation.
- This lower-bodied sound may be perceived as “male mimicry,” prompting a desire for dominance (with an effect noticeable enough that some studies recommend that women who are seeking leadership positions at their jobs avoid vocal fry entirely, as its use can inhibit their ability to outcompete their male coworkers).
- A creaky voice may be associated with less desirable states, such as one’s voice when getting out of bed first thing in the morning or when not engaged in energetic activity (which makes the intensity and pitch of the voice rise). As a result, women using vocal fry may be perceived as tired, uninterested, or lacking in attention and intelligence.
- Men who use vocal fry are taking advantage of lowering their voice further to contribute an air of dominant authority. Studies show that men get annoyed at women who use vocal fry because they “interpret the speaker as echoing an utterance from a position of authority to which she is not entitled.”
Uptalk can contribute to perceptions of a woman’s lack of intelligence and inferior status. Why?
- The rising intonation of uptalk mimics a question, subconsciously signaling that the woman is only ever questioning what she says and “knows nothing for sure.”
- Falling intonation is associated with confidence and forwardness. Uptalk inverts this expectation, creating a sense of uncertainty and lack of confidence.
- Asking questions implicitly through the use of rising intonation is a less direct method of query; thus, women who use uptalk (even when not actually asking a question) may be perceived as indirect, unsure, or non-confrontational and weak. This is despite research indicating that the more successful a woman is, the more likely she is to use uptalk.
The commonality between all these judgments is the comparison between women and men. It’s not that one modality of speaking is inherently better than the other (or that women exclusively use some forms of language); rather, patterns in women’s language are compared to men’s, which is set as the standard.
Women’s “deviation” from the norm is unavoidable when language from the “women bucket” is never taken as part of the standard of normalcy. In this way, women’s speech is inexorably linked to a male-centric language model that facilitates misogyny—and unless we take a more proactive approach to overcoming these biases, women will never receive the fair chances they deserve.
