We often make serious mistakes when we change our language out of fear

The importance of open discussion

We fear using weak language will change how we are percieved

We have a cultural obsession with toughness

Fear of femininity

Fear of being less competent, less authoritative in a situation

But this is just that, a fear

Apology example

How do we police our language out of fear for how we are perceived?
And what mistakes do we make in the process?

The question is inextricably linked to gender

She gives these tips

These tips catch on because people like feeling powerful, unapologetic, etc.

There is a supposition that certain of these words are female things

We are in desperate need for diologue

We WANT diologue, we live fore this stuff

Using language of certainty keeps us from having DEEPER INTERACTIONS

What's the big deal anyway? Isn't language just this fickle, transient thing we use to convey meaning that is in an of itself relatively meaningless?

Language can corrupt thought

Language DOES change how we're perceived (link to the beginning)

Are you percieved as a person I can talk to?

It changes how we exist in community

Safe spaces, etc

This sort of linguistic dishonesty makes us think differently of our own opinions

We change the way we talk, to create this thing

If we say this is what it is, or this is what "I believe", when it really is "I feel," that can makes us think we believe it

But sometimes it really does weaken what we want to say, saying I feel like instead of "this is" is definitely a step down in certainty

We police ourselves on this, taking up lots of mental energy to make sure we don't sound submissive, we tare ourselves up about it

Just, hedging isn't necessarily not authoritative, but we avoid because we have been told it is a weak word

Worthen brings up self absorbtion

The [issue] is in fact part of this larger problem of people not wanting to make their ideas palatable, not feeling the need to be nice to have honest and open discussion

We want to present our thoughts as facts, exhibiting them to our neighbors

Political polarization

This is linked to a broader trend of refusing to compromise, listen to each other in our governments

We think we have the right to hold our beliefs and hold them hard.

I dont think we don't have this right. Of course we have the right. My question is, is it the best way to go?

Fear of accomodation

We all talk, we all have to consider how

It means we're making a request of someone

We don't want to reduce our authority, we also don't want to overinflate it, with dishonesty

Adding this fake strength is real

Trump

I'm not a linguist, but I "feel like"...

A lot of the language is being regarded as being more feminine (even if it isn't)

Regardless, many of the vocal things happen to be adopted by young women (people who have had to be extra courteous because perhaps they are viewed as inferior). No one wants to do something associated with this group of people. They are regarded as stupid, incompetent, etc.

Many of our derogatory expressions use girls (young women) as the epitome of what you DON'T want to be like. "scream like a little girl", throw like a girl, "girly" is an insult, also meaning in poor taste

Don't act like you introducing something original here

Now I'm not saying we should always say "I feel like". The point here is to avoid dishonesty. Don't say I feel like, if you that's not accurate

Worthen mistakenly argues that the calls for safe spaces and trigger warnings in universities may be eroding students’ inclinations to assert or argue. She makes the mistake that is all too common, thinking that that these measures are to avoid offence, rather than to welcome students with diverse pasts and mental illness to join in the learning process. A trigger warning is just that, a warning, it functions to let people suffering from illnesses such as PTSD know in advance that certain things could be mentioned that may cause them to suffer a psychological attack, or relive a traumatic situation.
The calls for safe spaces and trigger warnings on campus are not calls to censor or keep tables of honest discussion from occurring, but allow more people to come to these tables, so we may learn more from each other and have real engaging conversation, not merely shouting hateful things or needlessly excluding mentally ill people from the classroom.

This “linguistic hedging”, as Worthen puts it, would seem to be some sort of honesty, an acknowledgement that we are not the sole arbiters of truth, and that all we can put forward into a discussion is our own beliefs. It seems a more honest, more constructive approach to conversation than voices shouting over each other that they alone have the facts.

Worthen argues that this phrasing is causing people to no longer have convictions. The fact is that, regardless of the phrasing, all of our own ideas are made of thoughts and feelings and beliefs. This is not a lack of conviction, it is an acknowledgement that we are held… Rather than say “Trump is a doer,” is it truly worse to say “I feel like Trump is a doer”?It allows us to deal with the real problem here. The problem with people being attracted to trump is not the fact that people see his deeds and think logically that he is a “doer”. No, the issue lays more that he makes people feel like a “doer”.

I would argue that the real issue here is that people believe these feelings should allow them to go against reason and make decisions that harm their fellow Americans. The real issue is the disproportionate weight put on what people feel like doing, rather than weighing the effect of their actions on people’s lives and policies. (I believe this issue also comes into play with those who “felt” they couldn’t bring themselves to vote, and did not take into regard the logic of whether this choice would be a helpful thing.) The prevalence of these words as a justification of political decisions is surely troubling, but the use of the words at large, which is what Worthen criticizes...

I also see no evidence that saying “I feel like” prevents discussion anymore than saying “I feel that,” or “I believe”. In my own experience among peers, the words are nearly synonymous and one will surely be challenged if what they say does not make sense. For example, if someone were to say in class “I feel like schools should be resegregated,” would that student not be challenged and have explained to them all the reasons that segregation was (and continues) to be an issue for schools across the country?
Worthen’s idea that such a remark would be met with “Well, I guess that’s just your experience”, is the backbone of much of her argument later in the article, and its destruction takes much of the zest out of her point, that the phrase should stop being used altogether.

I would argue that we are a little more complicated than that. That our usage of the phrase “I feel like” is a masquerade, hiding a more troubling truth, lurking in the corners of the internet and behind torches in charlottesville, that our self-centeredness has led us to believe our own feelings and beliefs are the authority on truth, that our half-formed ideas are the definitive fact {flesh this out more}, rather than a piece of a puzzle we must bring together in classrooms and in coffee shops and dining room tables, a small segment of a large (metaphor) to be constructed with the rest of humanity, bringing forward our ideas with the the simple “I feel like…”

We need to question what actually makes us better

"Leaving it out doesn't make you sound 'clearer and more confident', it makes you sound like a rude, inconsiderate jerk." [7]

We don't talk about the need (or desire) to be nice

Does this stuff not sell? Not exciting? Not EMPOWERING?

Women can challenge these things as they enter the workplace, instead of just trying to be manly, trying to be EFFECTIVE

On body language, for instance, one should not merely follow men, but find what will allow these women to overcome male privilege.

So part of this involves stopping telling women how to talk

Women having to police themselves

Cameron brings up body language

We should/do live in a world where being courteous of others is not a sign of inferiority but superiority

You go first

Just (asking for something)

Sorry

Is it necessarily a bad thing to make your ideas "more palatable"?

Does this actually help us?

We need to talk in such a way that is conducive to discussion