Marked women by appearance article

Marked wo workforce by appearance clause MARKED WOMEN In the Article marked women, Deborah Tannen explains the social way of assessment women by their appearance or other factors, but not perspicacity men for the same reasons. Tannen uses her observation during a conference confrontation of quaternity women and eight men to analyze how each charr in the meeting was marked while men were not. Again Deborah plosive speech sounds out the issue of how star sex writing or so the other is either portrayed as prejudiced or sexist. ADD MORE POINTS The author explains that men capture the unembellisheddom to wear what they want without much meaning being examine from their clothes, but for a wo humanness every style has a meaning. In the phrase Deborah Tannen says T here is no womans hair style that hatful be called standard, that says nothing about her further assumeing her point. The author uses the different clothe styles of three ladies in her conference meeting as examples when she tries to attribute them? to their single personalities. However, she noticed that the men were all dressed alike because they had the freedom to. In my opinion, the authors evaluation is restricted. Tannen did not consider the formal setting of her case canvas so to say.In such settings, men are often restricted to incarnate clothes and a plain haircut just like the ones she observed in her young-begetting(prenominal) colleagues in the article (page ) . For exercise, it is inappropriate for a man to go project hunting or for an interview in a pair of swindle and plain T shirt, but in a casual ass like a bar he has more freedom in his choice of outfits. This example shows that men are that unmarked in certain situations and settings. Further on, Deborah also claims that every womans style has an implied meaning. In separate 12 she says Each of the women at the conference had to make decisions about hair, clothing, establishment and accessories, and each decision had a carried meaning. She insinuates that a woman can hardly dress without judgment being passed on her dress. For example, if a woman wears a revealing or tight dress then she is viewed as attention seeking or available. I believe that the Deborah Tannens point here is true because from my experience, a persons appearance is the first criteria for judgment it makes your first judgement of the person. I dont totally agree with Deborah attributing this social evaluation to just women since a man can also be judged by how he dresses. His book binding says a lot about his personality, fashion choices, occupation, wealth and even his cozy orientation. You dont need anyone to tell you that a man who dresses in suits everyday full treatment in a firm or some business outfit while the man in overalls and hard hat is a twist worker. Next, the article makes a case about some words in the English language that are marked. Deborah Tannen describes that adding suffixes to some nouns to m ake them feminine (or about the fe mannish gender) seems to infer a sense of a sense of un-seriousness. In Deborahs example adding -ette to the Doctor to form Doctorette shows inferiority to a certain leg . In my opinion the author was myopic in her evaluation. She bases her case on the English language only, in making a general purpose about women. Some languages use the same words or completely different words for both genders. in French language il is used for the masculine gender and elle for the feminine gender and ils for plural they. It should be noted that these suffixes are just added to show grammatical differentiation in gender and not for social gender classification. The author cited an expert come Dr. Ralph Fasold in his book, ().. According to her citation, Dr. Fasold stressed that language and culture are in particular unfair in treating women as the marked case because biologically it is the phallic that is marked (paragraph 24, line 2). So with respect to this citation, in her opinion men should be the marked ones. This logic seems to be biased and irrelevant to the contrast about the women being marked and men unmarked, not which gender should. I believe it was a good citation but for the wrong argument. The article introduces a secondary argument about the societys view of one gender writing about the other. A woman writing about the man is viewed by the society as a prejudiced person. This is true in my opinion a female writing about a male is sexist. I feel a woman writing about for instance the flaws of the male character is sexist because both genders have flaws and why should only one gender be put to question. In conclusion, I speculate the author Deborah Tannen had a reasonable argument but her supporting order were somewhat biased and they were not strong enough to fully support the arguments. Moreover, she did introduce opposing opinions she just looked at the argument from a womans point of view. As far as my opinion goes women are judged a small-minded more than men, but that does not mean men are free this societal evaluation.