Worth a look: Women's use of equivocating language as a hidden source of power
Adam Grant's thought-provoking piece on gendered language in the workplace
Dear community,
Hard to believe we’re already midway through summer! I hope your summers are giving you respite and re-centering in some measure.
We’re now 10 days into our two-month stay in Oaxaca, a much smaller city than Mexico City, where we started our nomadic journey. In contrast to the bustle of CDMX (22 million strong), Oaxaca is quaint and quiet (with just 700,000 people) —with cobblestoned splendor that transports you to another time and a laid-back, unhurried quality — while being very real and approachable.
We’ve found our local grocers, favorite neighborhood coffee shop, plazas, rooftop bars and restaurants — and have even exchanged digits with another family at our local playground. In his second week at a local daycare (Spanish-speaking — his first), our son Rumi is starting to find his feet and is picking up new Spanish phrases daily — yesterday’s included ‘morado’ and ‘de nada’.
More to come in future newsletters on nomad life hacks, and especially on making it all work with a toddler in tow. As always, let me know if there are specific questions you’d like me to address — on any topic.
As we gear up for our next Zoom ‘community corner’ chat for paid subscribers, please take 1 minute to fill out this survey on your availability and preferences.
👀 Worth a look. Recommendations for particularly inspiring articles, books, movies, or shows that’ll make you think differently about health and well-being.
For today’s Worth a look column, I’d like to highlight
’s thought-provoking op-ed on gendered communication in the New York Times this week:Have you come across this article yet? Do you find yourself using conciliatory or 'weak’ language at work or in negotiations?
This might include:
🛹 Disclaimers ('I may be wrong, but...')
🎭 Hedges ('maybe,' 'sort of')
🧩 Tag questions ('Don’t you think...?')
I know I do. As someone brought up largely in Asia (in the Philippines and India), I find I tend to do this more often than folks brought up entirely in the US or in another individualistic society.
I remember a scene at a restaurant in Manila, where we wanted a specific dish that was no longer being served that night. The tendency to not want to be directly contradictory was so deep that our wait staff kept gently suggesting that we order something else because it was better — we never heard the words, “no, I’m sorry, that item is not available.” This is an example of how deep the cultural tendency to want to efface and avoid harsh conversational elements can be.
In fact, speaking like this was so ingrained in me that in the early years of my career in the US, where this is much less a cultural norm, I tried to consciously rework my language at work to sound more assertive and decisive.
This was therefore a fascinating read for me — to consider that instead of needing to be relearned, employing this kind of language is actually adaptive for women (and others) in many contexts.
Grant presents convincing data that conciliatory turns of phrase are clever adaptations that women can (often subconsciously) adopt in order to be more persuasive and likable at work, while working within gender-normative paradigms.
Speaking like this is therefore "a strategic advantage" and "an unappreciated source of strength" for women who master it, according to Grant — and I’d argue, for anyone who holds less power in a situation.
When I shared this article on social media, among the responses I received was from Geo Custodio, whose journey as a non-binary, transfemme Filipina was featured on Spread the light.
Ms Custodio said: “as a Trans person who occupies a grey area of gender… I find that I almost exclusively use this type of language. I wouldn’t [c]all it ‘weak’ as I am very aware of how I use it and why. I prefer to call it deferential language. I use it with both men and women, superiors and subordinates.”
She underlined the strategic value of using language like this to allow for wider inclusivity, saying, “It makes everyone feel heard and part of the conversation, and makes decisions feel like a consensus as opposed to a directive.”
Of course, as Grant is also quick to point out, gender stereotypes end up harming anyone who transgress them — for example, boys perceived as 'dependent' earn less as adults.
The ultimate aim is to do away with restrictive gender norms and stereotypes for once and for all — and with it, the need to modulate our tone and words according to who we are and how how much status and power we inherently have — to best achieve our aims.
In the words of Nikki Belt on social media: “But what if we didn't have to [do this]? What if we could confidently say what we think, engage in meaningful discussion and go on with our day?”
Yours in power and light,
Dr Devika Bhushan
What do you think about the implications of this article?
When have you noticed yourself using conciliatory language? How did it support or detract from your aims, and what did you notice about how others responded to you?