Wednesday, March 4, 2015
Indirectness vs Directness
In our society women are automatically given lower status than men and are judged especially by the way they talk. It has been that way all through history, women are just looked down upon and judged which is unfair and wrong. Men are seen as powerful, as for women they are seen as weak and powerless. In "His politeness is Her Powerlessness," Tannen states that women's ways of talking uttered in a spirit of rapport, are branded powerless. Just because some women speak indirectly doesn't mean she is weak in anyway she may just be trying to not sound so demanding. I think that indirectness is powerful in itself; for example, if your girlfriend was upset with you and just gives you that look you know you're in trouble, it shows. She doesn't need to say anything except show it through her face expressions and the way she's acting around you. Men on the other hand are more direct, they would be direct with their words and yes it may seem powerful but indirectness is just as powerful. Do you think being direct is more powerful or do you think being indirect is just effective?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Okay so I'm commenting on this because I really love Tannen's article. I don't understand how a persons amount of "powerfulness" can come from a linguistic strategy. Being direct can be powerful. Being indirect can be powerful. I know from personal experience that sometimes when you directly say something people's feelings get hurt; therefore, sometimes indirectness is the way to go. It honestly depends on the situation and whether or not it's appropriate to be direct or indirect. I also really don't get why indirectness is only associated with women. Men can be just as indirect. I feel like women are more indirect about casual everyday things where as men are more indirect about their feelings and emotions. Either way, either linguistic strategy does not make anyone powerless. Ugh.
ReplyDelete