326
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] nkat2112@sh.itjust.works 169 points 8 months ago

I found this to be a very well-written article about a concept I wasn't previously aware of. Here follow some interesting choice quotes - but I recommend reading the actual article:

When activist Jess Piper heard Alabama Republican senator Katie Britt deliver the GOP response to the State of the Union, she had a visceral reaction. The senator spoke in a breathy voice with a soft and sweet quality ― even as she described horrific acts of sexual violence and murder and painted a dystopian picture of the United States.

For Piper, there was no mistaking that sound, which permeated her childhood in the Bible Belt. Britt was using “fundie baby voice.”

Then more context - conveying submission to male authority:

“I would describe ‘fundie baby voice’ as a woman’s voice that is higher than average in both pitch and breathiness,” said Kathryn Cunningham, a vocologist and assistant professor of theatre and head of acting at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. “While the average woman’s voice is higher-pitched than the average man’s due to a combination of anatomical and social factors, some women who speak this way seem to be intentionally placing their voices higher than their natural pitch range in order to convey submission to male authority and childlike innocence.”

These changes in voice are deliberate:

Deliberate voice changes are very much a reality for women in fundamentalist Christian communities, noted Tia Levings, author of the upcoming memoir “A Well-Trained Wife: My Escape from Christian Patriarchy.”

“From a young age, we were taught over and over again to modulate our voices,” she said. “It was all about sounding sweet, soft, and childlike. There were very strict gender roles, and women were supposed to never sound angry but keep sweet, obey, dress modestly, speak softly, be very feminine.”

Interesting roots:

This sort of Christian vocal training has roots in Helen Andelin’s 1963 book “Fascinating Womanhood.”

“This book encourages fundamentalist Christian women to sound ‘childlike’ in order to convey submission to male figures,” Cunningham said, noting that there are “references to an idealized voice that a compliant, Christian woman should have.”

I found this quote referenced in the article very remarkable:

“It is important to emphasize in this discussion that women’s voices are always scrutinized and policed. The truth is that we can’t win, no matter how we speak.” - Kathryn Cunningham, vocologist and assistant professor

Of such women in power who use the fundie baby voice, the article goes on to quote the following:

“What they produce is a lot of abuse and subjugation,” Levings added. “And it always stings more when a woman is used as a tool of the patriarchy to promote it. They’re the Aunt Lydias and Serena Joys of the program ― brought in and given power when it suits men, but they will be discarded when it’s no longer useful to those men.”

Toward the end of the article, the very valid warning:

Piper urged those who are interested in the fundie baby voice phenomenon to educate themselves on the Christian nationalist movement in U.S. politics and the Project 2025 agenda. Directing ire toward those in power is more useful than tearing down everyday women for the way they were trained to speak.

[-] APassenger@lemmy.world 40 points 8 months ago

Solid recommend at the end.

[-] Pissnpink@feddit.uk 34 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I do agree, but my experience with fundie women (Christian women who "know their role") is that yes, there is point where they are victims of this system of belief, but they will NOT think twice about using their proximity to power to victimize/bully/subjugate others, whether it's people of color, lgbtq or anyone not in their bubble.

[-] Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

Angela from The Office.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Exactly. One of the most complicating factors in feminism has always been that there have always been means for women to use proximity to men to gain power over others in accordance with the power of those men. For example in the era shortly following the abolition of slavery in the United States women had practically no rights that did not come from their husbands or fathers, but could still get a black man killed by claiming he hit on her.

Some women prefer it that way. In exchange for autonomy they receive a form of alternative authority and are able to abdicate responsibility for the power exerted in their names. If you already wanted what they demand of you, then you have little reason to question the morality involved here and they sell a life that for some is very nice. And it’s not like you’ll need an abortion to save your life or will find your husband getting violent or will have a queer kid. That happens to other people, less holy people, sinners. They’re the ones who are why your life is difficult.

And there’s also the hypocrites. The Phillis Schlafely types. They believe they belong in their place but don’t want to do it so they try to make it mandatory.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nieceandtows@programming.dev 33 points 8 months ago

That is hauntingly fascinating

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago

I’d heard that voice, but didn’t know it was actively taught. What the actual fuck‽ Also why the fuck do these people want their wives to sound childlike‽ Maybe it’s just the lesbian in me talking but as I get older (not even 30 yet) I increasingly want my women more womanly. Give me an opinionated 40 year old over an insecure 19 year old every time. Every time I learn about fundamentalists pushing unnatural youth onto women I’m reminded of how I’ve heard that child molestation is more often about power than desire. And they act as though it’s all just nature, but if it was what was natural they wouldn’t have to put so much effort into reinforcing these hierarchies and forcing dominant women into servile roles and punishing men who are insufficiently dominant.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 4 points 8 months ago

It's really disgusting how we still have these ridiculous "norms" to deal with. In opposition to the baby voice we have women who need to modulate their voice to be deeper if they want to be taken more seriously in "professional" settings. It's all very stupid...

[-] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 72 points 8 months ago

Listening to Love Line back in the day and they could almost 100% predict who had been victimized as a child based on “little girl voice” which seems awfully similar to me.

[-] interrobang 65 points 8 months ago

fundie

victimized as a child

That venn diagram is a circle.

[-] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 months ago

Hey now, lots of people were victimized outside fundie circles.

No other notes.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 15 points 8 months ago

Ugh that's deeply disturbing.

[-] heyou@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Drew's goin for his wallet!

[-] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago

Yeah, and Drew claimed that he could ID "marijuana addicts" based upon how they laugh. The guy's a nut job.

[-] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 41 points 8 months ago

Sorry for the YT Shorts link, but here's a video of comparing Katie Britt's previous speaking voice and whatever the hell was going on during the SotU response. It's so bizarre.

[-] Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world 12 points 8 months ago

Honestly the “after” sounds like some sort of surrealist comedy skit like out of Portlandia or something.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Damn, that makes it sound even less likely that it really happened. How was this a good idea?

[-] Subverb@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

It wasn't a good idea. She was over-coached to pieces. I've heard pundits on the right and left say it's a shame what she did because by all rights she's a smart and capable woman.

Edit: I didn't say I agreed with her politics. Downvote if you want, but this kind of marginalization of a smart woman on either side of the conversation erodes the condition of all women.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

I don’t know anything about her besides that one speech, and it’s not a good look

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] yumpsuit@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Shor's blood, the Thu'um!

[-] tsonfeir@lemm.ee 32 points 8 months ago

Any man who likes that voice wants to fuck a child.

[-] almar_quigley@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago

I honestly couldn’t listen to the YouTube video comparison of her real and fake voice the whole way through. It was so hard to hear.

[-] nifty@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Edit: I feel bad about starting this whole thread. Retracted

[-] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 29 points 8 months ago

Moreover, trans women develop the same kind of vocal characteristics on HRT, so saying that women are doing this as some of cultural phenomenon is judgmental and wrong.

Just correcting a common misconceptions, for trans women the voice doesn't change on HRT, as the change in voice with testosterone is not reversible.

Getting similar voice/speech characteristics as cis women is pretty much cultural.

[-] nifty@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Thanks for the correction! Regardless, attacking women on their physiological traits just seems like such a misguided approach to attack someone for their ideas.

These characteristics exist in women who’ve never been exposed to such fundamental ideas! Policing women’s voices is just another way that conservatives are going to win allies.

Edit: what some transphobe might say based on Jess Pipers criticism—“apparently trans women cannot get soft voices on HRT, so these woke people want to police women’s voices out of existence.”

For the love all that is honest and good, I implore people to not attack others on aspects related to their genes and physiology. You’re no better than your ideological enemies then.

I am having a strong reaction to this post because everything about critiquing and policing something physiological about women just seems so misguided to me. Again, we can attack bad ideas without ad hominem attacks.

[-] CareHare@sh.itjust.works 8 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

“I would describe ‘fundie baby voice’ as a woman’s voice that is higher than average in both pitch and breathiness,” said Kathryn Cunningham, a vocologist and assistant professor of theatre and head of acting at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. “While the average woman’s voice is higher-pitched than the average man’s due to a combination of anatomical and social factors, some women who speak this way seem to be intentionally placing their voices higher than their natural pitch range in order to convey submission to male authority and childlike innocence.”

This assistant professor Kathryn Cunningham answers your question concerning women's anatomy I think.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

Oh yea, it's stupid no matter if it's purely philological or partly cultural.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz 19 points 8 months ago

Edit: I listened to Jess Piper in detail, her voice doesn’t sound any different to me than the voices of women she’s criticizing. What a weird dimension for women to attack other women on, and tbh that’s just a wrong approach to take!

This is something she addresses herself and says she learned as a trait growing up in the same environment as the women she's criticizing. She's still trying to unlearn it. You should listen to what she's saying instead of just the cadence of her voice.

load more comments (16 replies)
[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Did you listen to the video?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Holy shit there a name for that now. I still use after years of being an exjw. Its so fucking cringe.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2024
326 points (100.0% liked)

Atheism

4059 readers
54 users here now

Community Guide


Archive Today will help you look at paywalled content the way search engines see it.


Statement of Purpose

Acceptable

Unacceptable

Depending on severity, you might be warned before adverse action is taken.

Inadvisable


Application of warnings or bans will be subject to moderator discretion. Feel free to appeal. If changes to the guidelines are necessary, they will be adjusted.


If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a group that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of any other group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you you will be banned on sight.

Provable means able to provide proof to the moderation, and, if necessary, to the community.

 ~ /c/nostupidquestions

If you want your space listed in this sidebar and it is especially relevant to the atheist or skeptic communities, PM DancingPickle and we'll have a look!


Connect with Atheists

Help and Support Links

Streaming Media

This is mostly YouTube at the moment. Podcasts and similar media - especially on federated platforms - may also feature here.

Orgs, Blogs, Zines

Mainstream

Bibliography

Start here...

...proceed here.

Proselytize Religion

From Reddit

As a community with an interest in providing the best resources to its members, the following wiki links are provided as historical reference until we can establish our own.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS