Interview conducted by Em Griffin, author of A First Look at Communication Theory. Find more resources on this and other communication theories at www.afirstlook.com.
What a load of nonsense - language is an evolving artefact. Both men and women are continually introducing new words. There is an experience and education gap, but not a gender one. Just because women may 'choose' not to use the ‘power play’ words that some egotistic men use in an attempt to put down women does not mean those words are not available, or that the women are ‘muted’. It only means that we typically operate on a more emotionally intelligent level and ‘choose’ not to engage in such communications.
+Gail La Grouw You're right, women are not "muted," but if you've read Em Griffin's book chapter about it, it was clarified that women are not hushed, but their voices merely disregarded. For example, in politics, when men's and women's opinions clash, it is always the men's opinions that win out. In the case of laws, for example, like the prohibition of abortion in the Philippines, women did not have a say in that, not merely because the lawmakers who wrote that are all males, but also because those males refused to take women's perspectives on the matter at all. Also, the Muted Group Theory does not only focus on women as the muted group, but also show LGBT+ members or Indigenous People, and how they get muted because some "powerful" groups disregard their perspectives. They are not "muted" in the sense that they are not given the chance to say their piece, nor are they silenced. Rather, when they speak, their pieces are viewed as "subordinate," and while they do not speak, their silence is viewed as "agreement" to the perspective of the more powerful group. You may also be correct in saying that the Muted Group Theory is a load of nonsense - after all, it is just a theory.
Actually, since women's voices are disregarded, they are in a way hushed or devalued. This theory can be used in many social dynamics. It is not just women. People of color, for example are disregarded and hushed.
@@kschindle1 Thank you so much for this. It isn't just a choice of language, it's about how certain people become ignored, devalued, or never get treated as equal or being worthy of having societal priority. Our language is structured to serve those in power/on the top of the food chain. Easy example - there are 22 words used to describe men who are more sexually active, and all the words are positive or carry an interpretation of being a good thing (player) , whereas the ones for women are over 200 and are all discriminatory or negative (slut, whore). statistically speaking men are more sexually active than women, so this discrepancy only serves men, who are in power and have historically almost always been in the seat of power.
