The moral parameters of good talk: a feminist analysis

Abstract

In Moral Parameters oGood Talk Maryann Ayim begins with assertion that while other forms of human engagement and behaviour continually undergo examination and critique in order to scrutinize them for goodness and badness, there has ... been little sustained discussion of parameters of ordinary conversational exchanges (p. 14). It is her claim throughout text, and point around which all of her arguments are gathered, that way we to one another has not benefitted from same critical analysis and sanction as has been given other forms of behaviour primarily because, typically, mere talk has not been given status of real behaviour (p. 2).Following these opening remarks, rest of book pivots around central, fifth chapter, The Moral Criteria of Language, in which she elaborates features by which -- specifically -- might be considered morally defensible: that is caring, cooperative, democratic and honest. Furthermore, according to Ayim, these features of good talk are ensured by three criteria: anti-dominant/anti-confrontational, anti-hierarchical, and anti-self-centred individualism (pp. 81-118).By way of establishing problematic, in chapters two, three and four, Ayim offers an elaboration of major classic theoretical positions which have been used to either gender inequality as a function of male privileged language, or male privileged as a function of gender inequality. In these chapters Ayim presents key themes of arguments and offers some criticisms of them. Then, following chapter six where she establishes particularities of how gender politics and use come together discursively to disadvantage women, chapters seven, eight and nine explore consequences of that does not conform to parameters of good talk: exclusion, violence, limited opportunities and dishonesty. Finally, Ayim ends with statement that not only logical but morally admissible position on must be one that is configured by mandates of equality: cooperation and a commitment to give to others what we would claim for ourselves.I have always thought that best reviews of someone else's work are those which arise from a closely scrutinized place between rigorous scholarship on one hand and academic generosity, what Ayim calls standards embodying caring, cooperative, democratic and honest language (p. 226), on other. It is in this spirit with which I come to review of Good Talk, for while Ayim's points throughout this text are as important to make as they are clearly and logically argued, I found text often frustrating and at times redundant.Following from her observation that women and men differently with different effect and that this should be of moral concern (p. 8), Ayim dedicates first three chapters to an elaboration and critique of classic theories which attempt to gendered language: The Male Dominance Theory (chapter two), The Sex Roles Socialization Theory (chapter three), and The Appropriate Registers Theory (chapter four).In chapter two Ayim considers central dilemma embedded in the male dominance theory, question of whether the political dominance of males result in male speech patterns that are more forceful and dominant ... or [whether] ... male speech patterns ... [are] simply evaluated as stronger and more forceful because males occupy stronger positions in political hierarchy (p. 26). After considering some of forms of male linguistic domination she outlines three major critiques of the male dominance and in end concludes that while this theory may explain unequal gender relations, not: only in realm of discourse but in all aspects of our human relations, it does not conform to mandates of a moral accounting (p. 42) which requires not explanations but justification. …