The Talking That Really Matters

Are women really more talkative than men? Does it matter?

Not really. According to the researchers behind this study, "sex differences in conversational behavior have long been a topic of public and scientific interest." This stereotype, however, has aged over the years, and it’s not as relevant today. To me — and most other people — it makes no difference whether men or women speak more. The question that we should be asking is — who has the ability to speak with higher quality?

This is just one example of a
 school in Detroit that suffers
 from dilapitated conditions

A higher quality of speaking, formed from proper diction and grammar, can help a person convey their thoughts clearly. Many factors determine a person’s ability to do this; personality, upbringing, and societal norms are some important ones. An extrovert will tend to communicate more fluently than an introvert. While this true, many people do not have access to the most important factor: education. The main purpose of education is to provide a student the tools to effectively communicate with others. Education in any language or culture can improve a person's communication, and it provides the student with a more accessible path to success. Of course, many people have been successful without a proper education, but it is easier to stand-out from the crowd if you have a proper education. The issue is that not everybody has access to education, and even if they do have access, many learn in environments that hinder proper learning. Performing an in-depth research study on this topic would have helped society much more than the one I mentioned earlier about men and women.

I believe this is a lesson for all of us. Let's phrase our questions so that they improve society. Let me know if you agree or disagree in the comments section below!

Uniformly Marked

Deborah Tannen begins "There Is No Unmarked Woman" with a short anecdote of when she was observing the physical appearances of some men and women at a conference. She focuses on three aspects of their appearance: hair, makeup, and clothing. While these qualities do contribute towards whether or not a person is "marked" or "unmarked", they are not the only ways to mark a person.

Many years ago, I had lived in India for a few years, and the school that I went to required all students to wear a uniform. They also required students to cut their nails and keep a certain hair length. And no makeup was allowed. I used to think these rules were ridiculous when I first heard of them, but slowly I began to realize their purpose. By enforcing a strict uniform policy, the school was eliminating all methods of marking a person by their appearance. People were, of course, still marked by other ways. One girl used to raise her hand for every single question, and she constantly talked with the people next to her. Despite the uniform that made her look like her peers, her outgoing personality marked her as an easy-going and conversational person (although incessantly annoying at times). The uniform policy, unfortunately, wasn't perfect at keeping people unmarked: there was one boy who used to get bullied constantly for being plump.

Of course, being marked is not necessarily negative. Tannen says it best: "I [Tannen] felt sad to think that we women didn't have the freedom to be unmarked that the men sitting next to us had" (556). People are always going to be marked by some way or another, but we must move towards a society where an individual can choose whether or not to be marked.



What are your thoughts about uniform policies? Do you think they're effective in unmarking people?
Leave your thoughts in the Comments Section below!