WEBVTT - Vocal Fry and Other Speech Trends 0:00:01.840 --> 0:00:05.280 Welcome to Stuff you should Know from House Stuff Works 0:00:05.320 --> 0:00:13.600 dot com. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark, 0:00:13.600 --> 0:00:17.000 There's Charles W. Chuck Bryant, and we have a very 0:00:17.040 --> 0:00:20.919 special treat for everyone out there for your ears. Casey 0:00:21.040 --> 0:00:25.160 are video video producer extraordinaire is standing in as our 0:00:25.200 --> 0:00:29.160 podcast producer, so he basically is in charge of us 0:00:29.160 --> 0:00:34.519 in every way, shape and form. Right now, that's right. 0:00:35.200 --> 0:00:38.680 I I realized Chuck that, um, you're just doing vocal fry. 0:00:39.360 --> 0:00:42.720 I have no ear for it. Yeah, you know, before 0:00:43.080 --> 0:00:45.280 Casey we asked him to choose which one to do first, 0:00:45.280 --> 0:00:48.839 any with vocal fry, and I didn't even notice. Yeah, 0:00:49.840 --> 0:00:51.960 you got the fry filter. Do you think that means 0:00:52.000 --> 0:00:54.640 that I do it? Because I was trying to think. 0:00:55.480 --> 0:00:58.080 I know that I up speak sometimes they're up talk, 0:00:59.080 --> 0:01:02.680 but it's fairly infrequent. I think, yeah, and um, but 0:01:02.800 --> 0:01:04.679 I don't know if I like vocal fire or not. 0:01:05.240 --> 0:01:08.200 I have no idea whatsoever. I don't know. Did I 0:01:08.240 --> 0:01:10.959 just do it? Just now? I did? Didn't I? I 0:01:11.000 --> 0:01:13.319 don't know. We'll have to listen to the playback. I 0:01:13.319 --> 0:01:17.120 guess I just did it. Listen to the playback that 0:01:17.200 --> 0:01:20.600 sounds like normal speaking to me. I know, man, huh, 0:01:21.280 --> 0:01:24.319 because well, we'll get into this, but it's uh. A 0:01:24.360 --> 0:01:26.800 lot of people contend that there's a lot of sexism 0:01:26.840 --> 0:01:29.480 going on with it because I just said it, and 0:01:29.480 --> 0:01:31.600 people probably won't write in and say anything about it. 0:01:31.640 --> 0:01:34.520 But or a woman, people would probably write in and 0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:38.000 say the way you talk is so annoying. And you 0:01:38.000 --> 0:01:40.000 know what, I think like a lot of people are 0:01:40.000 --> 0:01:42.480 trying to dance around this or prove that it's sexist. 0:01:42.560 --> 0:01:46.559 It's like, no, on its face, this is a sexist 0:01:47.600 --> 0:01:50.440 argument that's going on right now. Yeah, I mean, just 0:01:50.560 --> 0:01:53.040 look around. We had Tracy and Hollyan recently and they 0:01:53.080 --> 0:01:57.440 talked about emails that they get about their voices being shrill. 0:01:57.440 --> 0:02:00.880 And I remember other podcast esters here we had in 0:02:00.920 --> 0:02:04.520 the past. Other women who had podcasts would get just 0:02:04.720 --> 0:02:10.239 lots of email detailing the quality of their voice, and 0:02:10.480 --> 0:02:13.200 we don't really get those much occasionally. I guess. No, 0:02:13.320 --> 0:02:15.600 you want to have some fun, go on to iTunes 0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:18.680 and find a podcast that is hosted by women and 0:02:18.720 --> 0:02:21.519 read the reviews, and then go read the reviews for 0:02:21.560 --> 0:02:25.760 a podcast that's hosted by men. It's yeah, it is. 0:02:25.840 --> 0:02:28.880 And when somebody like Bob Garfield from MPR calls the 0:02:29.240 --> 0:02:33.919 calls vocal fry repulsive. That's a really good point for 0:02:33.960 --> 0:02:36.040 everyone else to stand back and be like, what's this 0:02:36.080 --> 0:02:40.280 guy's real problem, because repulsive is not a correct word 0:02:40.480 --> 0:02:45.359 to use to describe vocal fry. It's wrong. It's it's wrong. 0:02:45.400 --> 0:02:48.280 It's like it's like he's pointing at something else, but 0:02:48.320 --> 0:02:51.000 he thinks he's pointing at the vocal fry. Who knows 0:02:51.040 --> 0:02:53.320 what's going on, but yes, on its face, it's a 0:02:53.360 --> 0:02:57.320 misogynistic argument. That's that's being carried out, putting out there 0:02:57.400 --> 0:02:59.680 right now. I don't plan on dancing around it at all. 0:02:59.760 --> 0:03:04.320 We're not dancing. Uh. And it is all very ironic 0:03:04.360 --> 0:03:08.240 considering that vocal fry can be traced back to British 0:03:08.280 --> 0:03:12.320 men in the nineteen sixties. Yeah, I mean think about 0:03:12.320 --> 0:03:17.520 like Sean Connery. Okay, I'm thinking about him. Okay, that 0:03:17.560 --> 0:03:19.400 was it had nothing to do with vocal I just 0:03:19.400 --> 0:03:20.880 wanted to see if I get you to think about 0:03:20.960 --> 0:03:24.240 Sean Conner. Well, apparently they traced it back to sixty 0:03:24.320 --> 0:03:26.920 four when British men the mid sixties used it to 0:03:26.919 --> 0:03:30.760 denote superior social standing. And I think I'm trying to 0:03:30.800 --> 0:03:33.120 imagine my head and I think it's like, you know, 0:03:33.440 --> 0:03:37.840 you shall not question me like that kind of thing. Yeah, 0:03:38.040 --> 0:03:43.480 like its masculinity and uh an into a statement by 0:03:43.520 --> 0:03:47.560 lowering your voice fry. It sounded like Welliam Randolph Hurst 0:03:47.600 --> 0:03:51.560 by the way, a lot like that. But but it 0:03:51.600 --> 0:03:55.160 makes sense also it basically when you hear vocal fry, 0:03:56.520 --> 0:03:58.240 it is and will tell you exactly what it is 0:03:58.240 --> 0:04:01.400 in a second, but you know what it is. Um, 0:04:01.520 --> 0:04:06.400 when you hear vocal fry, it denotes that you can't 0:04:06.440 --> 0:04:11.040 be bothered, to be enthusiastic about it, or in the 0:04:11.080 --> 0:04:13.040 case of British, another way to put it is it's 0:04:13.200 --> 0:04:17.360 very dry way, yeah, kind of you know. Um and 0:04:17.640 --> 0:04:23.440 they they say they linguists. Vocal fry and its current 0:04:23.640 --> 0:04:28.960 use among younger girls or millennials in general, is a 0:04:29.000 --> 0:04:33.280 way to indicate like I'm over it, or I am 0:04:33.360 --> 0:04:35.800 not to be bothered with this any longer, or in 0:04:35.839 --> 0:04:39.040 some cases it makes them seem authoritative. We'll get more 0:04:39.040 --> 0:04:41.360 into that. So in other words, it doesn't mean they're 0:04:41.400 --> 0:04:43.880 dumb and don't know how to talk correctly. They're actually 0:04:43.920 --> 0:04:47.039 trying to accomplish something, but speaking in a certain way 0:04:47.080 --> 0:04:49.560 like every other human on earth exactly. I just did 0:04:49.560 --> 0:04:52.239 it again. This is really gonna make me look at myself, 0:04:52.279 --> 0:04:56.880 I think, I think, I I think, well, actually, let's 0:04:56.880 --> 0:04:58.960 talk about up speak. This is gonna be all this 0:04:59.040 --> 0:05:02.120 is vocal fry, it's up speak. It's using the word 0:05:02.160 --> 0:05:06.359 like all these vocal mannerisms and ticks maybe that people 0:05:06.400 --> 0:05:10.640 have these days because language changes and evolves. We don't 0:05:10.680 --> 0:05:13.960 talk like we did sixty years ago. No, like, for example, 0:05:14.000 --> 0:05:17.600 the mid Atlantic accent is gone. What was that? That 0:05:17.760 --> 0:05:23.479 was the radio announcer. Yeah, that was kind of No, 0:05:23.640 --> 0:05:25.960 not really, I think that was the antithesis of it. 0:05:25.960 --> 0:05:29.560 It was more like, um, all right, uh, George Plimpton, 0:05:30.320 --> 0:05:35.839 Frasier Crane, Mr Burns. It's like it's like the difference 0:05:36.040 --> 0:05:40.120 is split between British and you know, um, Eastern American. 0:05:40.480 --> 0:05:43.160 I thought you were just naming old white dudes kind of. 0:05:43.240 --> 0:05:46.040 But I mean, it was the language of the aristocracy 0:05:46.080 --> 0:05:48.760 in the first half of the twentieth century, right, it 0:05:48.920 --> 0:05:52.200 is gone now. And they think that it was basically 0:05:52.279 --> 0:05:58.039 run out by guys like Jimmy Cagney and yeah and um, 0:05:58.080 --> 0:06:00.920 Marlon Brando, and that the way that they talked was 0:06:01.000 --> 0:06:04.120 not like that, and they made their style of talking, 0:06:04.160 --> 0:06:06.880 which is how we talk now. We're like super Brando 0:06:07.040 --> 0:06:11.720 now right, Uh is a result of mid Atlantic going 0:06:11.760 --> 0:06:15.039 away being replaced by this Well, well, it's not really 0:06:15.040 --> 0:06:16.400 my theory. I'm sure there are a lot of people 0:06:16.400 --> 0:06:19.120 that agree. I think that language does evolve, and that 0:06:19.520 --> 0:06:23.280 the people that the Garfields of the world, the Bob Garfields, 0:06:23.640 --> 0:06:27.920 not the cat Garfields. It's like, don't dray Garfield. And uh. 0:06:28.080 --> 0:06:30.640 The ones who rail against it so much, I think 0:06:30.720 --> 0:06:33.560 are like see and say like a lot too. But 0:06:33.600 --> 0:06:36.680 people it we also say, um, I get called out 0:06:36.720 --> 0:06:39.800 for saying um, yeah, I get it. It's fine. I 0:06:39.839 --> 0:06:42.279 think though, you go ahead. And so I think those 0:06:42.320 --> 0:06:45.599 people are just they're feeling like they're not relevant any longer, 0:06:45.680 --> 0:06:48.280 and no one wants to be a dinosaur. And so 0:06:48.680 --> 0:06:51.360 I don't understand the language these young women are speaking, 0:06:51.920 --> 0:06:54.720 which is bs because a lot of younger people, men 0:06:54.760 --> 0:06:57.279 and women speak that way. It's just called the way 0:06:57.320 --> 0:07:02.040 the younger generation speaks. And it's not like you, old man, right, 0:07:02.080 --> 0:07:06.600 so just go off to pasture, which is not the case. 0:07:06.640 --> 0:07:09.479 I don't think anybody's trying to make this the older 0:07:09.840 --> 0:07:15.000 middle aged white man feel irrelevant. We haven't. We're on 0:07:15.040 --> 0:07:17.920 our way there anyway, and I feel irrelevant. But it 0:07:17.920 --> 0:07:20.080 has nothing to do with up speak or vocal fry. 0:07:20.320 --> 0:07:22.440 It's the music these kids are listening to these days. 0:07:22.480 --> 0:07:24.440 But I think I think you have nailed it on 0:07:24.480 --> 0:07:26.840 the head though, like like, it is a form of 0:07:26.920 --> 0:07:31.040 contempt for being replaced by something new, something that's different. 0:07:31.320 --> 0:07:34.720 And as we'll see, especially when it comes to linguistics, UM, 0:07:35.160 --> 0:07:37.920 younger girls tend to be at the bleeding edge of 0:07:38.080 --> 0:07:43.480 linguistic changes. So UM the perhaps and this is all 0:07:43.560 --> 0:07:45.680 we want to just make sure you guys understand that 0:07:45.720 --> 0:07:49.160 we understand this total pop psychology on our part. But 0:07:49.240 --> 0:07:51.880 it's also it's intuitive, it makes a lot of sense. 0:07:52.200 --> 0:07:56.559 But the idea that UM, older middle aged white men 0:07:57.200 --> 0:07:59.720 who are threatened by vocal fry or find it repulsive 0:07:59.800 --> 0:08:04.200 or pugnant or whatever, UM, they are projecting their their 0:08:04.520 --> 0:08:08.240 sense of being replaced, of being irrelevant, being put out 0:08:08.280 --> 0:08:10.840 to pasture. I agree wholeheartedly. I think that's exactly what. 0:08:10.960 --> 0:08:14.360 There's not enough to control the free world for since 0:08:14.400 --> 0:08:16.960 the beginning of time, right which the fact that they 0:08:17.000 --> 0:08:21.280 do is still UM says that's the reason why we're 0:08:21.320 --> 0:08:24.040 even having this conversation. That's the reason why some women 0:08:24.520 --> 0:08:27.240 find the need to go to speech therapists to get 0:08:27.320 --> 0:08:30.240 rid of their vocal fry, which is something that some 0:08:30.400 --> 0:08:33.559 even podcasters have done. All right, so let's talk up 0:08:33.559 --> 0:08:36.719 talk real quick, up talk or valley girls speak as 0:08:36.760 --> 0:08:39.200 when you in a sentence, UM as if you're asking 0:08:39.240 --> 0:08:43.640 a question like that, and that has been a thing 0:08:43.960 --> 0:08:47.560 for a long time. Um, there was a first of all. Two, 0:08:47.679 --> 0:08:50.040 we should point out that most of the studies we're 0:08:50.080 --> 0:08:54.559 gonna put in here, terrible social psychology studies funk, almost 0:08:54.600 --> 0:08:56.800 all of them, well because they just they never do 0:08:56.880 --> 0:08:58.840 it right. You could do some decent studies on this, 0:08:58.920 --> 0:09:03.239 I think, but for instance, this one uh at California, 0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:07.880 San Diego, they did a close acoustical analysis of twenty 0:09:07.920 --> 0:09:12.680 three Southern Californians perfect sample size. Yeah, two didn't show 0:09:12.760 --> 0:09:15.640 up from very diverse backgrounds. Apparently, I don't know how 0:09:15.640 --> 0:09:19.360 diverse you can get among twenty three people. But they said, 0:09:19.679 --> 0:09:22.760 here you have two tasks. UM, give directions with a 0:09:22.840 --> 0:09:26.720 map and then describe a sitcom clip. And they found 0:09:26.760 --> 0:09:29.320 that UM, women did use up talk twice as often 0:09:29.360 --> 0:09:34.000 as men. But UM in making declarative statements like my 0:09:34.040 --> 0:09:37.160 appointment is at nine o'clock. Men and women, um use 0:09:37.720 --> 0:09:40.640 rises the same, So like basically men did the same 0:09:40.679 --> 0:09:43.080 thing with that kind of statement. And then the other 0:09:43.120 --> 0:09:45.880 one that makes sense to me is when giving directions. 0:09:46.480 --> 0:09:49.640 A lot of people use up talk because it's you're 0:09:49.640 --> 0:09:52.960 sort of asking a question, like, you know, go up 0:09:53.000 --> 0:09:56.440 to the McDonald's a memorial drive. It's basically saying, do 0:09:56.520 --> 0:09:59.440 you understand what I'm saying? Are you following me? Yeah? 0:09:59.480 --> 0:10:02.640 It's almost it's funny. I wondered this chuck about up 0:10:02.640 --> 0:10:07.599 talking in particular. Um is it? Is it like a 0:10:09.160 --> 0:10:13.840 way of kind of in inadvertently mocking your listener, Like 0:10:13.880 --> 0:10:17.240 men trail off very frequently when women start talking. So 0:10:17.280 --> 0:10:21.120 if women evolved to basically keep men engaged at the 0:10:21.240 --> 0:10:23.520 end of each sentence, like yeah, are you still with me? 0:10:24.200 --> 0:10:26.120 Do I have to keep leaving you along by the 0:10:26.160 --> 0:10:30.360 hand in this conversation where you know, if that's where 0:10:30.360 --> 0:10:33.199 it originally came from. Place holding or floor holding is 0:10:33.240 --> 0:10:36.360 another reason they found that women use up talk because 0:10:36.679 --> 0:10:39.360 they want to give um the listener the idea that 0:10:39.400 --> 0:10:42.920 they're not done talking yet, don't interrupt me, And it 0:10:43.000 --> 0:10:45.880 might make sense maybe women are interrupted more than men. Oh, 0:10:45.920 --> 0:10:49.880 I would say that's a distinct possibility. Um, there's been 0:10:49.920 --> 0:10:53.520 a bit of a linguistic trace to this whole thing, 0:10:53.559 --> 0:10:56.480 to up speak, in particular vocal fry. I couldn't find, 0:10:57.160 --> 0:10:59.040 you know where they think the origin of it was, 0:10:59.320 --> 0:11:02.400 But with ups there was a UM I believe. She 0:11:02.520 --> 0:11:06.400 was a linguist named Cynthia Macklemore back in University of 0:11:06.400 --> 0:11:11.120 Texas in Austin UM. She studied a sorority house on 0:11:11.200 --> 0:11:15.080 campus there and was the first person to detect up speak, 0:11:15.280 --> 0:11:18.559 which became known as or which was already I guess 0:11:18.559 --> 0:11:21.600 known as as Valley girl. But she she didn't coin 0:11:21.640 --> 0:11:23.400 the term up speak, but she was the first to 0:11:23.440 --> 0:11:26.280 think to really study it. UM. And then a guy 0:11:26.440 --> 0:11:31.040 named James Gorman coined the term up speak in like 0:11:31.120 --> 0:11:36.679 two years later. But maclemore traced in this UM sorority 0:11:36.720 --> 0:11:40.400 house the origin of the up speak to the very 0:11:40.400 --> 0:11:43.319 popular girls from l A. Although you canna say to 0:11:43.400 --> 0:11:46.079 one sorority sister, no, I'm I'm wondering though, if there 0:11:46.160 --> 0:11:48.120 is this, like a patient zero of this in the 0:11:48.200 --> 0:11:51.520 United States. UM, back in l A, there's the Valley 0:11:51.559 --> 0:11:54.120 girl talk that is clearly related to up speak, right, 0:11:54.440 --> 0:11:58.640 and that movie was huge, right, so back in the sixties, 0:11:58.880 --> 0:12:03.200 they've traced it back to Australia or New Zealand. So 0:12:03.440 --> 0:12:05.880 it is possible, this is my own pet theory here 0:12:06.480 --> 0:12:10.120 that some very popular girl moved from Australia or New 0:12:10.200 --> 0:12:15.440 Zealand to Los Angeles, wowed her friends. We started emulating 0:12:15.440 --> 0:12:18.760 the way she talked, which is up speak, and it's 0:12:18.760 --> 0:12:21.079 spread from there. You know. Now they think about the 0:12:21.160 --> 0:12:25.280 Australian accent. It is sort of up speaking, isn't it. Yeah, 0:12:25.320 --> 0:12:28.200 a little bit. Yeah, they're like because there's like basically 0:12:28.240 --> 0:12:31.480 like you're getting like hitting the ribs with their elbow 0:12:31.640 --> 0:12:35.960 just from the way they're talking, Like, yeah, you're following along. Yeah, yeah, 0:12:36.120 --> 0:12:38.800 it's very interesting. So let's let's take a break, man, 0:12:39.720 --> 0:13:04.400 take a break man. Yeah, okay, alright, we're back. This 0:13:04.480 --> 0:13:06.840 stuff fascinates me. By the way, I could I could 0:13:06.840 --> 0:13:11.839 be a linguist. I could study linguistics and be a 0:13:11.960 --> 0:13:19.199 linguistics researcher and specialist linguists I like linguistic or linguistic. 0:13:19.559 --> 0:13:23.280 Yeah sure, if you're a year old girl, that would 0:13:23.320 --> 0:13:26.040 be a widespread word twenty years from now, right, and 0:13:26.080 --> 0:13:28.400 people like Bob Garfield would say, we remember when we 0:13:28.520 --> 0:13:34.120 called it all right, So specifically, let's just talk about 0:13:34.240 --> 0:13:36.800 the what vocal for I actually is in the throat. 0:13:37.640 --> 0:13:42.200 Um glottalization is probably the more scientific term, and what 0:13:42.320 --> 0:13:44.839 it is. It's a it's a vibration when your voice 0:13:44.880 --> 0:13:49.760 falls and your vocal cords flutter very slowly, um, because 0:13:49.880 --> 0:13:53.360 they can't make the A tone any longer at that register. Right, 0:13:53.400 --> 0:13:59.040 It's called chaotic flapping, right, chaotic glottal flapping. I like it, yeah, 0:13:59.240 --> 0:14:02.360 And it sounds like it would hurt, but it actually doesn't, 0:14:02.960 --> 0:14:05.559 except although I think most um, your nose and throat 0:14:05.559 --> 0:14:08.480 guys will tell you that, um, if you did this 0:14:08.520 --> 0:14:12.680 in a sustained manner yelling for a while, yeah, you 0:14:12.679 --> 0:14:16.360 could damage your vocal yell a vocal Friday, I guess 0:14:17.040 --> 0:14:19.040 he almost tried. I didn't. I was like, I'm not 0:14:19.080 --> 0:14:22.800 doing that, yeah, because I associate it with falling off 0:14:22.840 --> 0:14:25.160 of a sentence and not being right, you know, which 0:14:25.200 --> 0:14:29.000 is where it's usually placed these days. But this the 0:14:29.080 --> 0:14:32.160 author of this article on Husta, first Voice and current 0:14:32.840 --> 0:14:36.240 there's become the grabster of late Oh yeah, yeah, the 0:14:36.280 --> 0:14:41.800 modern times grabster. Oh boy, Well, no, grabs are still 0:14:41.800 --> 0:14:44.600 a legend. Yeah, I'm just saying this person who stepped 0:14:44.600 --> 0:14:46.360 in to fill in the void a little bit. Well, 0:14:46.440 --> 0:14:50.200 let me say too quickly that I'm doing nothing but 0:14:50.320 --> 0:14:53.480 listening to my voice right now, and I can't imagine 0:14:53.480 --> 0:14:56.960 what it's like to constantly be worried about that because 0:14:57.040 --> 0:14:59.240 usually we come in here and so safe haven. I 0:14:59.240 --> 0:15:01.320 don't think twice a about how I sound, they sound 0:15:01.360 --> 0:15:03.880 how I sound, But just like put yourself into the 0:15:03.880 --> 0:15:06.600 microscope like that, which is I think a lot of 0:15:06.600 --> 0:15:10.480 women in broadcasting probably like suffer from that. I just 0:15:10.520 --> 0:15:13.680 said like like five times, you know, but I don't 0:15:13.680 --> 0:15:17.240 care who cares. You're a man, You're white man ag 0:15:17.280 --> 0:15:22.600 eighteen forty nine. Yeah, still under forty nine. Yeah. Is 0:15:22.640 --> 0:15:25.120 that the cut off point? Then I'll become Bob Garfield? 0:15:27.400 --> 0:15:30.040 Oh man, Garfield's gonna hate this for this. Uh So 0:15:30.160 --> 0:15:32.320 Garfield is not the only one. There are plenty of 0:15:32.360 --> 0:15:35.240 women out there calling out younger women saying it's a 0:15:35.320 --> 0:15:40.240 disempowering act to speak like this. Um Naomi Wolf is 0:15:40.280 --> 0:15:42.600 one of them. She wrote an article that I read, 0:15:43.360 --> 0:15:46.720 and she said it projects uncertainty and weakness and low intelligence. 0:15:47.840 --> 0:15:50.520 Uh I doubt if she thinks it's the same one 0:15:50.560 --> 0:15:53.920 men do it, which is therein is it's as black 0:15:53.960 --> 0:15:59.320 and white as you can be, Like, what's the difference? Well, yeah, 0:15:59.400 --> 0:16:01.760 I think that it's ultimately the thing. I think that 0:16:01.880 --> 0:16:04.720 that kind of is a I think that argument misses 0:16:04.800 --> 0:16:07.240 the point and it pops up a lot people who 0:16:07.360 --> 0:16:11.520 defend girls and women's right to vocal fry or up 0:16:11.560 --> 0:16:14.680 speak or say like or just as another one, you're 0:16:14.880 --> 0:16:18.320 very guilty of that. It's like hedging your your actions, 0:16:18.400 --> 0:16:22.040 Like I was just saying, not like I'm saying like 0:16:22.200 --> 0:16:24.640 this is what I'm saying, it's I was just saying, like, 0:16:24.720 --> 0:16:26.920 I'm going to tone it down a little bit. Well, 0:16:26.960 --> 0:16:28.800 it's the same thing with women feeling like they need 0:16:28.840 --> 0:16:31.280 to apologize all the time. Sure, using sorry a lot, 0:16:31.880 --> 0:16:35.920 um with vocal fry in particular, though there's it doesn't 0:16:36.280 --> 0:16:40.240 it doesn't really denote anything like what the people who 0:16:40.280 --> 0:16:43.760 are saying it it does does like, it doesn't necessarily 0:16:43.880 --> 0:16:49.200 denote that you don't have any confidence in what you're saying. Um, 0:16:50.080 --> 0:16:53.000 I could see something like hedging things with just a 0:16:53.120 --> 0:16:56.160 lot or saying sorry a lot. Maybe so, But the 0:16:56.240 --> 0:16:58.680 idea that um, women have to be given advice on 0:16:58.800 --> 0:17:01.920 how to speak to pep up in this you know, 0:17:02.280 --> 0:17:06.680 male dominated world. Again, I feel like it misses the point. 0:17:06.760 --> 0:17:10.560 I think that the better argument is to basically say, hey, UM, 0:17:11.640 --> 0:17:14.480 what's the name of the mirror you're looking into their buddy? 0:17:14.960 --> 0:17:18.920 What's your problem? Like, really, honestly, what is your problem? 0:17:19.440 --> 0:17:23.200 Not why you know? Yes, let's get on the bandwagon 0:17:23.240 --> 0:17:26.000 and rail against girls and women who do this and 0:17:26.160 --> 0:17:29.560 totally ignore men that do. But what's the real problem? 0:17:29.760 --> 0:17:32.280 And I think ultimately the real problem is these men have, 0:17:32.400 --> 0:17:37.440 whether they realize it or not, UM identified girls as 0:17:38.960 --> 0:17:43.040 significant agents of change that are bringing along a different 0:17:43.119 --> 0:17:47.920 world than these men grew up and were accustomed to UM. 0:17:48.960 --> 0:17:51.000 And and they're right in a lot of ways. There's 0:17:51.040 --> 0:17:56.479 actually UM studies that point to women and especially young girls, 0:17:56.720 --> 0:17:59.440 as the agents have changed when it comes to grammar, 0:17:59.560 --> 0:18:03.280 vocabul larry UM and speech patterns in the Western world 0:18:03.320 --> 0:18:06.239 for hundreds of years. Now, UM, did you read did 0:18:06.280 --> 0:18:09.400 you read a little bit about that study? Which one? 0:18:09.840 --> 0:18:13.760 So there was one in UM, I believe two thousand nine. 0:18:14.359 --> 0:18:19.560 And get this, these two finished researchers poured over six 0:18:20.200 --> 0:18:25.959 thousand letters, six thousand letters and um. They were from 0:18:26.040 --> 0:18:30.040 fourteen seventeen to sixteen eighty one, and they found written letters. 0:18:30.680 --> 0:18:33.520 They found frond these letters in the Western world that um, 0:18:33.640 --> 0:18:37.560 women tended to adopt new world new words faster, discard 0:18:37.680 --> 0:18:41.960 old words faster, and um just change their grammar and 0:18:42.400 --> 0:18:45.879 uh speech patterns are writing patterns much quicker than men did. 0:18:46.720 --> 0:18:48.960 And then other studies have shown that men tend to 0:18:49.000 --> 0:18:51.440 pick up on this about ten to twenty years later. 0:18:52.760 --> 0:18:54.840 So I think, what's going on When you're saying, well, 0:18:54.920 --> 0:18:57.480 men do it too, It's like, yeah, men didn't do 0:18:57.560 --> 0:18:59.359 it at first, men are starting to do it now. 0:18:59.680 --> 0:19:02.320 So if you take all this as as fact and 0:19:02.440 --> 0:19:07.080 correct scientifically, then what we're seeing now is the widespread 0:19:07.119 --> 0:19:10.960 adoption of a change in speech pattern that began twenty 0:19:11.040 --> 0:19:14.200 years ago with younger women right in the valley and 0:19:14.320 --> 0:19:18.000 has spread to the rest of culture. Um and is 0:19:18.040 --> 0:19:22.240 being adopted. And this change to the rules of grammar, 0:19:22.280 --> 0:19:24.600 there are rules to how you talk and address people. 0:19:25.320 --> 0:19:28.880 That that's what's being railed against the change. But really, ultimately, 0:19:28.960 --> 0:19:32.040 again speaking from a pop psychology standpoint, it's the world 0:19:32.119 --> 0:19:34.280 is changing, and these guys feel threatened by it because 0:19:34.400 --> 0:19:37.600 they don't know what's going to come after this. Nothing, 0:19:38.400 --> 0:19:42.000 that's the answer. People getting getting all worked up about 0:19:42.040 --> 0:19:44.879 the way people talk is just it's folly. To me, 0:19:45.080 --> 0:19:48.359 it's nothing. It's language. It changes. Nothing bad is going 0:19:48.400 --> 0:19:50.320 to happen. They're gonna wake up tomorrow in the world's 0:19:50.320 --> 0:19:52.920 gonna be exactly the same, right, They're just not gonna 0:19:53.000 --> 0:19:55.600 like it the way some people talk. I think also 0:19:55.680 --> 0:19:58.480 those it's deeper than that that. It's like they do 0:19:58.600 --> 0:20:00.680 have something to fear. They do have like their nest 0:20:00.720 --> 0:20:03.359 egg to to be lost in there in the stock 0:20:03.480 --> 0:20:06.760 market when it drops automatically, or girls are going to 0:20:07.000 --> 0:20:09.480 take their money, yeah exactly, you know, or not being 0:20:09.720 --> 0:20:13.120 being able to be employable but still needing a job 0:20:13.200 --> 0:20:15.159 at age seventy. You know. Like, I think there is 0:20:15.200 --> 0:20:17.280 a lot to fear, and I think it's being projected 0:20:17.359 --> 0:20:22.560 onto girls who vocal fry. Agreed, Okay, I'm all over 0:20:22.600 --> 0:20:24.280 the place. Let's take a break. I need to regain 0:20:24.320 --> 0:20:46.240 my composure, all right, all right, chuckers. So you're kind 0:20:46.240 --> 0:20:52.359 of talking about, um, you know why people vocal fry, right, 0:20:52.440 --> 0:20:54.920 and um, there's some pretty good answers to it that 0:20:55.040 --> 0:20:58.879 have been studied. Um. In addition, to like up speak 0:20:58.960 --> 0:21:01.960 where you are it's a placeholder where you're saying, don't 0:21:02.000 --> 0:21:05.640 interrupt me, there's more to come, or are you following 0:21:05.720 --> 0:21:08.760 this because I'm really trying to keep you engaged here, 0:21:08.880 --> 0:21:12.320 you know, like when you hear someone, when you hear 0:21:12.359 --> 0:21:16.680 an interrogative at the end of a statement, you're immediately like, oh, 0:21:16.760 --> 0:21:20.480 I'm I'm expected to respond, so I better be paying attention. 0:21:20.760 --> 0:21:23.280 So this is almost like tricking people into paying attention. 0:21:23.359 --> 0:21:25.000 That's another way to do it. It sounds like a 0:21:25.040 --> 0:21:28.479 pretty good move to me. On the other side again, Uh, 0:21:29.000 --> 0:21:32.760 there's the idea that it says that women are unsure 0:21:32.800 --> 0:21:35.919 of their opinion or anybody who uses up speak unsure 0:21:36.000 --> 0:21:39.840 their opinion. Um, By by keeping it a question, it 0:21:40.640 --> 0:21:44.359 suggests that you can easily back off of it and 0:21:45.640 --> 0:21:49.200 to your statement that much exactly. And I actually saw something. 0:21:49.680 --> 0:21:51.880 It was a two thousand one article in The Guardian 0:21:51.960 --> 0:21:55.520 about up speak in particular, and um they were saying 0:21:56.440 --> 0:22:00.880 that some people believe that up speak became prevalent as 0:22:00.880 --> 0:22:05.680 a result of PC, like the political correctness movement, to 0:22:05.840 --> 0:22:08.000 where it gives you the chance to be like but 0:22:08.280 --> 0:22:10.800 I don't really agree with that, you know, depending on 0:22:11.119 --> 0:22:15.920 the micro expressions of the person exactly. Yeah. Um, and 0:22:16.040 --> 0:22:18.280 that one actually, that one kind of holds water in 0:22:18.600 --> 0:22:23.440 a sense because we've definitely entered a second phase of 0:22:23.600 --> 0:22:26.639 like the PC movement. It's definitely been a surgeon it 0:22:26.880 --> 0:22:30.840 about the same time as the surgeon up speaker with 0:22:30.960 --> 0:22:35.200 it becoming widespread. It's possibility. Again, no one has any 0:22:35.280 --> 0:22:37.200 idea at this point, but those are kind of the 0:22:37.240 --> 0:22:40.159 two sides for up speak with vocal fry, it is um. 0:22:40.640 --> 0:22:43.159 The critics of it say that it it suggests that 0:22:43.280 --> 0:22:48.080 you are you sounded unenthusiastic. And on the other side, Yeah, 0:22:48.160 --> 0:22:50.480 that's actually one of the tools that it it is 0:22:50.840 --> 0:22:53.520 that maybe they're unenthusiastic about what they're saying. But you 0:22:53.680 --> 0:22:57.439 also said that it's um. It's been found to be employed, 0:22:57.840 --> 0:23:02.040 especially by younger girls when they're trying to sound authoritative. 0:23:02.920 --> 0:23:06.520 I mean, that's what some linguists have said. Uh, here's 0:23:06.560 --> 0:23:08.680 another terrible study for you, and this one got a 0:23:08.760 --> 0:23:11.040 lot of press. I remember when it came out that 0:23:11.240 --> 0:23:14.600 you will have a harder time getting a job, um 0:23:15.119 --> 0:23:18.280 if you use vocal fry and up speak. And for 0:23:18.440 --> 0:23:22.800 this one, uh, they had two different recording recordings they 0:23:22.840 --> 0:23:25.560 played too, and four hundred women for a range of 0:23:25.600 --> 0:23:28.080 groups asked them to rate the speakers and who who 0:23:28.119 --> 0:23:30.920 you might hire, and no one wanted to hire the 0:23:31.000 --> 0:23:35.240 vocal fryers. And what they came out with later was, oh, 0:23:35.359 --> 0:23:38.520 by the way, we didn't just use regular people who 0:23:38.560 --> 0:23:42.720 happened to vocal fry. We got people to vocal fry 0:23:42.800 --> 0:23:45.000 on purpose, like to act it out and to do 0:23:45.080 --> 0:23:48.239 an accent, which is just throw the whole study out 0:23:48.280 --> 0:23:50.880 the window. Then we'll see in their in their defense, 0:23:51.000 --> 0:23:53.879 I'm sure this was all in the study, but the 0:23:54.080 --> 0:23:56.680 people in the media who reported on it didn't bother 0:23:56.800 --> 0:23:58.760 to read the study. They read the abstract, and then 0:23:58.800 --> 0:24:02.320 that's where all the headlines the tour through the news 0:24:02.400 --> 0:24:05.560 cycle came from. Right, So the idea that, um, these 0:24:05.640 --> 0:24:09.080 people who were who were trained as part of the 0:24:09.119 --> 0:24:12.280