TOW #3: "There is No Unmarked Woman"

Deborah Tannen is a professor of linguistics at Georgetown University and best-selling author of more than fifteen books. Her works tend to focus on how linguistics play a role in interpersonal communication, especially that between men and women.  "There Is No Unmarked Woman" is an essay that is part of a longer piece written for the New York Times, entitled "Wears Jump Suit. Sensible Shoes. Uses Husband's Last Name." In it, she analyzes the impact that clothing and appearance have on perceptions people, contrasting the ideals set for men and women.

There Is No Unmarked Woman begins by utilizing direct evidence from a recent conference Tannen attended, in which she described looking at the three other women and analyzing the unique style of each. While doing so, she realized that while each woman had her own distinct way of presenting herself, the men remain 'unmarked.' Her audience appears to be mostly female, as she uses collective pronouns to refer to them, in quotes such as "we women didn't have the freedom to be unmarked" (556).

Tannen uses her background in linguistics extremely effectively, as she begins to develop the basis of her argument by an analysis of the word 'marked' in linguistic theory. She describes, "the unmarked form of a word carries the meaning that goes without saying" (553) and continues by explaining how endings like ess and ette are diminutive and mark words as female. In addition to gendering the root word, they also "mark [it] for frivolousness...gender markers pick up extra meanings that reflect common associations with the female gender: not quite serious, often sexual" (553). She builds on this statement by asking readers, "Would you feel safe entrusting your life to a doctorette?".

In addition, Tannen uses biological explanations of gender differences as explained by Ralph Fasold in his book The Sociolinguistics of Language. Biologically, Tannen explains, it is the male that is marked, with the Y chromosome replacing one of the two X chromosomes that make a female. So why, then, does language defer to maleness as the default option? "If language reflected biology, grammar books would direct us to use 'she' to include males and females and 'he' only for specifically male referents", Tannen argues (555).

Her anecdotal evidence and reasons grounded in linguistics and biology make a convincing argument for readers, even those who do not consider themselves feminists. Through ties to concrete science, Tannen asks her audience to consider what it truly means to be 'marked' in the eyes of society, and whether or not the standards we set out for women are even attainable.