ClydeR
01-21-2019, 08:34 AM
Margaret Thatcher figured this out before everybody else. When it comes to female politicians, voters prefer candidates with deep voices. To lower her voice, Thatcher took voice lessons.
Kirsten Gillibrand is going to have a problem with her voice. She made the rounds this weekend on political teevee shows. No matter how smart she is and no matter how good her policy proposals are, her voice will be a drag on her political prospects.
It's science..
But what about a female candidate? Well, that’s where things get a bit tricky. Women naturally have higher-pitched voices than men. So whereas a low-pitched voice is a sign of masculinity, a high-pitched voice is a sign of femininity. But here’s the catch—politics is still perceived to be a masculine sport. We want leaders who exude strength and toughness. This means that when it comes to politics, even women are expected to have deep voices. In fact, most of the research shows that having a deep voice is even more important for female candidates than male candidates, precisely because it is one of the few physical cues a woman can utilize to make herself appear more masculine. No wonder why Margaret Thatcher purposely dropped the register of her voice during her term as British Prime Minister.
But maybe we’re jumping the gun here. Maybe deep voices do actually convey better leadership abilities. People with deep voices do have higher testosterone so it could be that a deep voice is an accurate indication of strong leadership abilities. Well, it turns out researchers have explored this question too and the answer is a big, fat no.
More... (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-social-thinker/201809/why-deep-voiced-politicians-get-more-votes)
When it came to judging the male candidate, Republicans voted more for the candidate with the deeper voice (see graph below). They want their leaders to sound strong and dominant. This makes some sense, given that prior research indicates Republicans are more attuned to threats and more focused on political policies that ensure safety and security. Instead, Democrats showed no voting preference at all between the two types of voices.
When it comes to female politicians, here is one place where conservatives and liberals agree (Wow—almost didn’t think that was possible!). Both Republicans and Democrats were more likely to vote for the female candidates with deeper voices.
Kirsten Gillibrand is going to have a problem with her voice. She made the rounds this weekend on political teevee shows. No matter how smart she is and no matter how good her policy proposals are, her voice will be a drag on her political prospects.
It's science..
But what about a female candidate? Well, that’s where things get a bit tricky. Women naturally have higher-pitched voices than men. So whereas a low-pitched voice is a sign of masculinity, a high-pitched voice is a sign of femininity. But here’s the catch—politics is still perceived to be a masculine sport. We want leaders who exude strength and toughness. This means that when it comes to politics, even women are expected to have deep voices. In fact, most of the research shows that having a deep voice is even more important for female candidates than male candidates, precisely because it is one of the few physical cues a woman can utilize to make herself appear more masculine. No wonder why Margaret Thatcher purposely dropped the register of her voice during her term as British Prime Minister.
But maybe we’re jumping the gun here. Maybe deep voices do actually convey better leadership abilities. People with deep voices do have higher testosterone so it could be that a deep voice is an accurate indication of strong leadership abilities. Well, it turns out researchers have explored this question too and the answer is a big, fat no.
More... (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-social-thinker/201809/why-deep-voiced-politicians-get-more-votes)
When it came to judging the male candidate, Republicans voted more for the candidate with the deeper voice (see graph below). They want their leaders to sound strong and dominant. This makes some sense, given that prior research indicates Republicans are more attuned to threats and more focused on political policies that ensure safety and security. Instead, Democrats showed no voting preference at all between the two types of voices.
When it comes to female politicians, here is one place where conservatives and liberals agree (Wow—almost didn’t think that was possible!). Both Republicans and Democrats were more likely to vote for the female candidates with deeper voices.