"Making Changes: The Debate on Sexist Language" by Deborah Cameron Blog #12

I agree with many of the arguments presented in Cameron's article. I'm not surprised that there are more insults readily available for women as opposed to men. In my opinion, it's a lot more common for women to be ostracized in general. Another thing that stands out to me is the "terms of endearment" often used by men to address women. I'm sure that many men do not mean disrespect when they refer to a woman as "Dear" or something like that. I worked through college at a coffee shop, and many men, especially seniors, would call me dear or hunny. Generally, I found it to be friendly, because I worked in more of a friendly environment, serving people. However, there were instances that I've experienced these types of terms where they have not been in friendliness. When a man is referred to as "sir" but then a woman is referred to as "sweetie", it does communicate disrespect. That person is communicating an entirely different level of respect toward the man, and is placing him on a "higher level" than the woman. It's interesting to see that woman are often infantilized and devalued by our language.

"This New Species that Seeks a Language: On Sexism in Language and Language Change" by Nancy M. Henley Blog #11

After reading this article, I can honestly say that my mind was changed a little. I used to think that most of the idea that sexism exists in language was just "left-wing" notion. The evidence in this article has convinced me that it does exist in our language, and the bias in language only prolongs the sexism against women in our culture. One of the things that stood out to me was the fact that, while men are usually referred to according to their occupational status, women are reffered to by their relational status. This never really occured to me, even though it's obvious because a woman's "title" shifts between Mrs., Miss, and Ms., while a man is always Mr., despite his marital status. This emphasizes the fact that woman continue to be defined by their relational and marital status. I also found it interesting that "neutral" occupations are still modified with gender, like "lady judge". It shows that our language is truly biased toward men, because occupations without a specific gender attached are immediately registered as male in most people's minds.

"The Relativity of Linguistic Strategies: Rethinking Power and Solidarity in Gender and Dominance" by Deborah Tannen Blog #10

Tannen's article was incredibly interesting, and I have never thought of conversation being used to establish solidarity or dominance. The information in the article actually helps me understand how a lot of miscommunication happens in conversation. I though the example of the woman asking a man she works with, "Where's your coat?" and he replies, "Thanks, Mom." was an excellent example of how intent is miscommunicated. She was attempting to show solidarity, or caring for him as a peer, and he felt like she was being condescending. It's interesting to think that people in general need to work harder to make their intent clear, and less ambiguous.

It's interesting that there is such ambiguity between establishing power over another, as opposed to building rapport. It was also a fascinating example of the person who's friend is always insisting on paying for dinner. The friend is either being generous and "showing solidarity" or establishing power by showing they have more money, and it's nearly impossible to tell. Most people feel that they must reciprocate every nice thing that someone does for them. For example, if someone has their friends over for dinner, most of the time the friends want to reciprocate. In a way, it is showing that most people do not want to be in a subordinate position. It's funny that our language even reflects our attitude that we don't want to "owe" somebody something.

"Complimenting--A Positive Politeness Strategy" by Janet Holmes Blog #9

I agree with the author's findings in this article wholeheartedly. I find that compliments often put people at ease, and it's not unusual for a compliment to spark up an entire conversation. I thought her ideas on compliments not always being considered so polite was very interesting. Holmes' example of the Pakeha woman giving a necklace to the Samoan friend was a great example, and it reminded me of something that happened to me not too long ago. I complimented a woman at church on her necklace, and she took it right off and gave it to me. I felt very awkward, mainly because my intention was truly just to compliment the necklace. I wasn't saying it because I wanted it, and I undestand why that can be off-putting.

I also agree with her notion of compliments between intimates not being received well among other people. I have five sisters, and there are things we "compliment" each other on that I wouldn't say to another person. If my sister told me, "Wow, your skin is looking really clear!", I would just thank her. But, if someone I didn't know so well said the same thing, I would probably be a little offended because of the implication that, at one point, they thought otherwise.

"I'm Sorry, I'm Not Apologizing"--Tannen, Blog #6

This article was almost humorous to me because I realized how often myself and those I interact with use apologizing incorrectly. "I'm sorry" truly has become a conversation smoother, rather than an actual apology. I noticed I tend to do this a lot, and I have in the past ended up taking blame for things I wasn't responsible for. More importantly, I have used this in conversation and it hindered my ability to fully communicate my thoughts.

I was reminded of an experience where I apologized to someone that was actually apologizing to me. They had done something very hurtful, and when I realized that they were remorseful and trying to apologize, instead of acknowledging the fact that I was, in fact, upset, I apologized for their remorse. I remember being frustrated after because I had been hurt, and I wasn't entirely "over it" yet, and I felt like I didn't get to communciate exactly how upset I was. I should've been comfortable for their remorse for something wrong they did.

I think "I'm sorry" and "I apologize" really have become space fillers, like "you know", "um", and sighs, etc. We must be careful not to "over apologize", because it seems to communicate a sense of low self-esteem and low worth. Self-deprecation, as Tannen states, can even be seen as apologizing when "I'm sorry" is never uttered. It's interesting to me that self-deprecation and negative comments about oneself can be taken as an apology. That fact shows that apologizing can be associated with weakness and low self-value, which is why "over-apologizing" should be avoided.

"Interaction: The Work Women Do"--Fishman Blog #5

I never considered the idea of adding suffixes to positions (i.e. stewardess, actress) as evidence of a male-dominated society and language. However, it is extremely interesting and it is becoming more and more obvious to me that English is truly bent toward males. I also thought it was interesting that men are referred to more by their last name and women are referred to more by their first, even though they may hold the same rank. It's strange how many hidden and underlying signals there are in the English language and in society that show the power given to the male gender.

I also think Fishman does a good job at explaining why questions are so common in language. I found it interesting that we often form our comments into questions because questions generally ellicit a response. If we didn't "ask questions", the conversation would generally fail. The notion of "attention beginnings" was an eye-opener for me, and I found that I do this very often in conversations. Furthermore, the explanation of "minimal responses" was interesting, and from my point-of-view, extremely accurate. Men often use them and a lack of interest is displayed, whereas women may use them to show they are listening or to "support" the conversation. I thought it was funny that this is so common in my conversations with my husband. I tend to get irritated or frustrated when I'm telling a story or explaining something and he doesn't encourage me to elaborate or go on. On the other hand, I feel it necessary to "support" his end of the conversation and continue to show my interest.

"A Cultural Approach to Male-Female Miscommunication" by Daniel N. Matlz and Ruth A. Borker

This article was also pretty accurate according to my own experiences. I thought it was interesing how they explained that women are far more likely to ask questions and carry the responsibility of keeping a conversation going. I have found myself doing this multiple times, especially when I'm meeting new people. This article also expressed the same notion as Tannen's article, that women are more likely to use pronouns such as "we" and "us" whereas a man is less likely. The thing that struck a chord deeply with me from this article was the concept of "delayed minimal responses". This has been a source of frustration and sometimes humor throughout my two years of marriage. If my husband and I are discussing something or if one of us is upset, he has a tendency to not respond or say anything at all. Sometimes I go on talking or "expressing my feelings", and when he decides to speak, he'll resond to something I said fifteen minutes before. While at times it is extremely frustrating, it's extremely humorous after the fact because men and women communicate SO differently! It's amazing that men an women found a way to communicate at all. It really does take an honest effort to learn the in's and out's of female-male communication.