But the observations made by this article do not appear to be rooted in any actual research, only generalizations and assumptions about very commonly used phrases. This article is also from a dating website which capitalizes on the differences between the genders and monetizing ways to help “better understand each other.” Overall, while the observations do fall in line pretty closely with the theories discussed in class, it seems that this website has more to gain from emphasizing differences in language between genders rather than giving objective information, so all of these findings should be taken with a grain of salt.

 Jackson states that, “at Glassdoor we’ve decided that it’s time for another wake-up call. Sure, women in the workplace may have leaned in and silenced the “sorrys,” but we’re now guilty of another diction demoralizer. We polled women executives, working moms, college women, and Facebook feminists to find out what’s the one word (aside from “sorry”) that women need to quit using.” This asserts that not only do women need to change their speaking patterns without giving reason as to why this is necessary, but also forces a random group of women to arbitrarily pick a word that is suddenly inappropriate for women to use. Then at the end of the article, Jackson implies that women using “just” and similar “diction demoralizers” might be part of the reason for the gender pay gap.

This article is filled with a strange bias that acknowledges the gendered oppression of women but subliminally blames them for it. Rather than looking at larger societal issues, or even actually studying speech patterns, it reinforces this idea that women need to change in order to “outsmart” the patriarchy. There is no science here and there is very little to do with speech patterns, only the continued capitalization of women feeling bad about themselves disguised as empowerment.