Thursday, February 16, 2017

Speaking Science: Why do I blush at the start of a speech?

Several readers of the blog have been asking about blushing at the start of their talks, with comments along these lines:

"What can I do about suddenly turning red right before I start to speak? It makes me feel terrible and unprofessional, and I don't understand why it happens when I don't feel nervous otherwise! Most importantly, how can I stop blushing like this?"

Blushing is one of the most mysterious things that people do, and unfortunately it is mostly out of our conscious control. Blushing is fueled by the body's autonomic or unconscious nervous system--the same one that tells your heart to pump and your stomach to digest.

The mechanics of how a blush happens are straightforward. Underneath the skin of your face and neck is a lacework of tiny blood vessels called capillaries, which dilate under the influence of adrenaline to allow more blood and oxygen to flow. And a blush isn't something you can fake. Unlike most human expressions, you can't force a blush to appear on your face. (Or, sadly, demand that your capillaries shrink back to size.)

But you're in good company if you don't understand why you blush, because scientists from Charles Darwin onward have been perplexed by what Darwin called "the most peculiar and most human of all expression." The research on blushing covers a wide ground, and its findings match most of what we already know from novelists. Blushing can signal embarrassment, shame, self-consciousness, pride or guilt.

The good news, however, is that more recent studies about chronic blushing and blushing and social anxiety have offered some insights that may lead to less blushing, and less worry about your red face.

What does a blush mean?


Duke University social psychologist Mark Leary suggested in a 1992 study that there are four main types of attention that can cause blushing:
  1. some sort of "threat to public identity," which could be anything from tripping on a street curb to clapping at a performance when the rest of the theater is silent; 
  2. an openness to scrutiny, or a situation that makes you the center of attention; 
  3. praise or positive attention; and
  4. accusations of blushing. 
All of these situations seem to trigger the body's "fight or flight" response that unleashes face-flushing adrenaline.

Public speaking can involve all four of these, of course. You may think of speaking as a threat to your public identity because you are fearful that your words may displease your audience. For women especially, historically taught to be silent, the very act of public speaking may make you feel as if you are violating normal behavior. Speaking does put you at the center of attention. And if you've ever had anyone comment on your blush, you may have felt yourself feeling hotter and redder by the second.

But blushing isn't all about you, and your feelings. Some evolutionary biologists think that blushing has evolved like other emotions in that it serves as an important signal. For instance, a 2009 study led by University of Amsterdam clinical psychologist Corine Dijk suggests that a person who blushes after committing some sort of social blunder--knocking over a grocery display, for instance--is more likely to be forgiven for the act by observers if she blushes. Dijk says that in this case the blush makes the person appear more sympathetic, and is taken as a signal that she is genuinely sorry about the social "mistake."

Other researchers have found that blushers tend to think their red faces are more noticeable than their observers do, and frequently overestimate the social consequences of blushing. Some scientists have noted an unfortunate side effect of these misperceptions: worrying about whether you blush and how obvious your blush can actually lead to further blushing that is measurably more intense.

Handling the heat


Given all this, is there any way for a speaker to minimize blushing?

"Since the blush is an automatic response, one can only get rid of the blush altogether by modifying one's concerns about one's public self-image, or become less concerned with the impression one makes on others," says Peter J. de Jong, a clinical psychologist at Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.

De Jong and his colleagues have conducted several studies of blushing, often in the context of treating it as a symptom of social anxiety disorder. The steps that one can take to reduce the fear of blushing "typically also result in less frequent blushing," says de Jong, who is also the co-editor of The Psychological Significance of the Blush.

In a 2011 study by de Jong and others, for instance, the researchers asked participants to practice cognitive behavioral therapy techniques over seven sessions as a potential way to reduce their fear of blushing. The goal of cognitive behavioral therapy, sometimes called CBT, is to change patterns of inaccurate or negative thinking so that a person can respond more effectively to challenges. The study used therapies such as concentration games and relaxation techniques, which reduced the fear of blushing among the participants up to a year later.

If blushing before a speech is bothering you, a CBT technique such as mindful breathing might be a good place to start--even better if you make these kinds of relaxation practices part of your regular routine. If you are a speaker with a diagnosed social anxiety disorder, your health care team might be able to recommend other more intensive types of CBT as well.

For public speakers prone to blushing, de Jong suggests, it is also useful to "learn how to focus more of their own attention on their task at hand" instead of worrying about what their audience sees.

"The ultimate aim would be to become a bit more indifferent--and probably also more realistic--about the social implications of your speech or performance, and also about the social impact of displaying a blush," he notes. "During the Dutch training we use the flash card Negeer en concentreer, which roughly means 'ignore'--the blush or your ideas about a negative evaluation--and 'concentrate'--on the task at hand, which implies an outward instead of inward focus."

(Freelance science writer Becky Ham contributed this post. Creative Commons licensed photo by Ryan Somma)

Get involved in more conversations on public speaking with The Eloquent Woman. Follow our Facebook page, read great quotes from eloquent woman on Pinterest, follow me as @dontgetcaught on Twitter or track when others tweet about the lack of women speakers on programs via @NoWomenSpeakers. Learn how to be a better panel moderator with The Eloquent Woman's Guide to Moderating Panels.

Monday, February 13, 2017

The Eloquent Woman's weekly speaker toolkit

Savvy speakers keep up with my wide-ranging reading list on women and public speaking by following The Eloquent Woman on Facebook, where these links and articles appear first. I always collect them here for you on Mondays as well. It's a great way to expand your public speaking knowledge:
Get involved in more conversations on public speaking with The Eloquent Woman. Follow our Facebook page, read great quotes from eloquent woman on Pinterest, follow me as @dontgetcaught on Twitter or track when others tweet about the lack of women speakers on programs via @NoWomenSpeakers. Learn how to be a better panel moderator with The Eloquent Woman's Guide to Moderating Panels.

Friday, February 10, 2017

Famous Speech Friday: Elizabeth Warren's silencing in the U.S. Senate

Reading a letter from someone else is a common tactic in public speaking. Often, it's a powerful tool for the public speaker, offering a compact endorsement of the points you wish to make. And that was, no doubt, among the motivations for Senator Elizabeth Warren, who sought to read a now-famous letter from Coretta Scott King during the Senate debate about the nominee for Attorney General of the United States, Warren's fellow Senator Jeff Sessions.

King, the widow of civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr., was a powerful witness to injustice; you can find her speech on the 10 Commandments of Vietnam in The Eloquent Woman Index of Famous Speeches by Women, as just one example. The letter in question this week was sent in 1986 to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, which was then considering whether to appoint Sessions to a federal judgeship. King, who could not appear live to testify, asked that her letter be entered into the Congressional Record, the official archive of what is discussed in Congress, and that was done.

So Warren this week was choosing to read a well-known letter about the nominee that was already an official document of the Congress to her colleagues in the Senate, during a debate on Sessions's pending appointment. Sounds appropriate on all counts, and perhaps even slightly less risky to use the words of a famous civil rights leader as the bulk of your remarks, right?

Not even. Here's how the New York Times described the scene after Warren began reading the letter in the Senate chamber:
Sensing a stirring beside her a short while later, Ms. Warren stopped herself and scanned the chamber. 
Across the room, Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, had stepped forward with an objection, setting off an extraordinary confrontation in the Capitol and silencing a colleague, procedurally, in the throes of a contentious debate over President Trump’s cabinet nominee. 
“The senator has impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama, as warned by the chair,” Mr. McConnell began, alluding to Mrs. King’s letter, which accused Mr. Sessions of using “the awesome power of his office to chill the pre-exercise of the vote by black citizens."
You can see video of the interruption here.

Sen. McConnell used Rule XIX of the Senate to make the procedural move. When Warren asked to continue her remarks, McConnell objected again and the senator chairing the session ordered her to take her seat. Following a debate on the silencing, Warren was formally silenced until the debate on the nominee ended mid-week.

“Sen. Warren was giving a lengthy speech,” McConnell explained. “She had appeared to violate the rule. She was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted.” Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards later called that statement, "The history of progress for women, summed up in 11 words."

This did not, however, end the letter-reading by Warren. Democrats in the Senate began posting on Twitter with the #LetLizSpeak hashtag, sharing the letter and indicating support. News media covered the silencing and shared the letter. And Warren, not to be undone, stood outside the Senate chamber hours later and delivered remarks and the letter on Facebook Live. McConnell's three words--"Nevertheless, she persisted"--quickly became a feminist rallying cry, and #ShePersisted a new hashtag.

As Tuesday turned into Wednesday and the furor over her silencing became clear, some male Democratic senators rose to read the very same letter, in whole or in part--and were not interrupted or chastised for doing so. As the male Democratic senators and Warren are in the same party, the exception can't have been purely political. So why was the woman silenced, and not the men? Same content, different gender, different standard?
You can see that Warren scared the male Republicans in the way several of them doubled down on criticizing her, even after it was clear public opinion was with her. Sen. Marco Rubio, a Republican, spoke at length on the Senate floor to defend the silencing (note that Fox News calls Warren "Chief Running Mouth," another attempt at silencing her). Sen. Lindsay Graham said the silencing was "long overdue," because "she is clearly running for the nomination in 2020."

The reality is that Warren commands a larger audience nationwide, compared to many senators, and is known as an effective and persistent critic who gets a lot of media attention. She might, as many other male senators have done, be contemplating a run for president. In other words, she was silenced for being effective in her work as a senator. “They were waiting to Rule 19 someone and they specifically targeted Elizabeth,” said Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. “I think because she’s effective.” So when you are silenced in your work, remember that it happens at much higher pay grades, too. If it happens to her, it can happen to you.

Warren's silencing gave her the last laugh: At this writing, Warren's livestream statement has been seen 11 million times on Facebook, with hundreds of thousands of reactions and shares. The views have been doubling each day this week. The full 10-page letter from King runs to 10 pages, and you can read it here. What can you learn from this famous speech?
  • Stay calm if you are interrupted with a surprise: This is one of the toughest tasks for a speaker, but it's worth pausing, taking a breath, and remaining calm as Warren did. Wait to see what the interruption is before you respond, and work on responding, not reacting. 
  • If you are silenced, say so: “Tonight I wanted to read that letter, and Sen. Mitch McConnell and Republicans came to the floor to shut me down for reading that letter,” Warren said in her livestream. Name the people or organizations that silence you--it's the best way to take back your voice and your control.
  • Use your other microphones: As Warren demonstrates, you're not limited to the venues that ban your speaking, especially not with social media tools at your disposal. The Senate floor is a powerful venue open only to 100 people, but a senator can reach many more people on Facebook Live than she can in a televised debate. And the controversy over silencing Warren meant that her remarks received most of the debate's coverage in the media, so the strategy to silence her backfired.
  • Don't let them shame you for being "outspoken:" Warren is often described as "vocal" and "outspoken," and not in a nice way, even though most of what senators do is public speaking. These words are silencing tactics, used most often on women. In this debate, she was warned by the chair not to read this letter, but did so, anyway. Warren, whose first appearance on The Daily Show found her vomiting backstage due to nervousness, is now a practiced and fearless speaker who simply persisted. Ignoring the shamers is the best revenge for an eloquent woman. Let them say, "Nevertheless, she persisted" about you.
Speaking the next day to civil rights leaders, Warren said, "What hit me the hardest was, it is about silence. It’s about trying to shut people up. It’s about saying, ‘No, no, no, just go ahead and vote.’ This is going to be hard. We don’t have the tools. There’s going to be a lot that we will lose. But I guarantee, the one thing we will not lose, we will not lose our voices.”

Here's the video of her reading of the letter on Facebook Live:

During the debate on whether to make... - U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren | Facebook

Get involved in more conversations on public speaking with The Eloquent Woman. Follow our Facebook page, read great quotes from eloquent woman on Pinterest, follow me as @dontgetcaught on Twitter or track when others tweet about the lack of women speakers on programs via @NoWomenSpeakers. Learn how to be a better panel moderator with The Eloquent Woman's Guide to Moderating Panels.

Thursday, February 9, 2017

King, Hamer, Ginsburg, Obama: Speech collections & a memoir

Women speakers often are left out of collections of "major speeches." But of the four recent finds I've made in speech collection and a memoir, three are by important women speakers. I'll be adding these to The Eloquent Woman Booklist, my collection of useful books about speeches and speaking as featured on this blog. Add these to your speaking shelf:
  • Ruth Bader Ginsburg: My Own Words, by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, collects her speeches and writings; if you buy the audiobook, you can hear recordings of her delivery of many of the speeches. Ginsburg's humor and thoughtfulness are on display here in a way the court bench does not always permit. This is the first volume of Ginsburg's autobiography, and I'm so delighted she began by releasing her influential speeches.
  • Fannie Lou Hamer: The Speeches of Fannie Lou Hamer: To Tell It Like It Is, edited by Maegan Parker Brooks and Davis W. Houck, is the first collection of speeches by the noted civil rights activist, including transcriptions of her extemporaneous remarks. While often called illiterate as a means of dismissing her, she was, in fact, able to read and write. And she was one of the most formidable and persuasive speakers of the America civil rights movement. This collection shows why.
  • Barack Obama: We Are the Change We Seek: The Speeches of Barack Obama, by E.J. Dionne, Jr. and Joy Redi, collects key speeches of the most recent former U.S. president, with 26 major speeches. Sam Leith's review notes patterns in the written speeches, adding that Obama's delivery made them unique and persuasive. 
  • Coretta Scott King: My Life, My Love, My Legacy, just out this month, collects the memoir of King, who shared her thoughts before her death in 2006 with Dr. Barbara Reynolds. She recalls numerous important speeches, including her 10 Commandments on Vietnam, which we've covered here on the blog. In some cases, the text is shared as well as her recollections of the events of the day, although this is not a collection of speeches. Still a great read.
Get involved in more conversations on public speaking with The Eloquent Woman. Follow our Facebook page, read great quotes from eloquent woman on Pinterest, follow me as @dontgetcaught on Twitter or track when others tweet about the lack of women speakers on programs via @NoWomenSpeakers. Learn how to be a better panel moderator with The Eloquent Woman's Guide to Moderating Panels.

Monday, February 6, 2017

The Eloquent Woman's weekly speaker toolkit

Savvy speakers keep up with my wide-ranging reading list on women and public speaking by following The Eloquent Woman on Facebook, where these links and articles appear first. I always collect them here for you on Mondays as well. It's a great way to expand your public speaking knowledge:
Get involved in more conversations on public speaking with The Eloquent Woman. Follow our Facebook page, read great quotes from eloquent woman on Pinterest, follow me as @dontgetcaught on Twitter or track when others tweet about the lack of women speakers on programs via @NoWomenSpeakers. Learn how to be a better panel moderator with The Eloquent Woman's Guide to Moderating Panels.

Friday, February 3, 2017

Famous Speech Friday: Viola Davis's Golden Globes Meryl Streep intro

Meryl Streep's acceptance speech for the Golden Globes lifetime achievement award a couple of weeks ago made a major splash (you can read its Famous Speech Friday entry here). So you can be forgiven for forgetting, for a moment, the introduction Streep received from fellow actor Viola Davis. Even though Davis went on to receive her own award and give her own speech that same evening, it was her introduction of Streep that got the most coverage and attention--so much so, it was reproduced the next day by the New York Times alongside Streep's remarks.

That's a lot of attention for an introduction, a common and commonly ignored form of public speaking. Davis, however, created an introduction that was anything but easy to ignore. And that's a daunting task in introducing Streep, who is known on the awards acceptance stage as a deft and thoughtful introducer who takes particular care with her words and delivery on someone else's behalf. You'll find a great example of this in Streep's introduction of actor Emma Thompson.

At the core of this short speech, after describing what it's like to have Streep stare at you and ask you a lot of questions, Davis shares her insight about the star actor:
And as she continues to stare you realize that she sees you. And like a high-powered scanning machine she’s recording you. She is an observer and a thief. She waits to share what she has stolen on that sacred place, which is the screen. She makes the most heroic characters vulnerable, the most known familiar, the most despised relatable. Dame Streep. Her artistry reminds us of the impact of what it means to be an artist, which is to make us feel less alone. I can only imagine where you go, Meryl, when you disappear into a character. I imagine that you’re in them, patiently waiting, using yourself as a conduit, encouraging them, coaxing them to release all their mess, expose, to live. You are a muse. Your impact encouraged me to stay in the line.
Davis's conclusion hit with a similar impact. She related how her husband kept urging her to tell Streep what she meant to her, during the time they worked together on a movie. Davis held back. And then, in this speech:
I haven’t said anything. But I’m gonna say it now. You make me proud to be an artist. You make me feel that what I have in me, my body, my face, my age, is enough. You encapsulate that great Émile Zola quote that if you ask me as an artist what I came into this world to do, I, an artist, would say, I came to live out loud.
What can you learn from this famous speech?
  • Lavish care upon your introductions: Every introduction is a small speech, one that translates the person being introduced to the audience. A good introduction sets that relationship up with a unique perspective, insight, or little-known experience--and relates the introducee to the occasion, be it an awards ceremony or a panel discussion. 
  • Make it personal: If you are just reading a prepared bio, you're doing it wrong. You may not know the honoree or speaker well, but you can use those moments before you go on stage to figure out something that allows you to make your introduction personal. If you know well the person you're introducing, don't hesitate to put yourself and your perspective into it.
  • Treat it like a little TED talk: Davis's intro does just that, jumping right in with "She stares. That's the first thing you notice about her," instead of a lot of throat-clearing. This introduction is just under five minutes, not one minute of which is wasted, and it aims to connect the audience--full of people who think they know Streep, as well as fans watching at home--even more deeply with the actor. The delivery is as fine as you might expect from a great actor. Davis takes her time with it, so that every word is clear and can be heard and savored. Go and do likewise the next time you introduce someone.
Watch the video here or below. Watch it more than once. This speech is Davis's fifth entry in The Eloquent Woman Index of Famous Speeches by Women, making her one of our most-featured speakers. She's a great model for your speaking.
Get involved in more conversations on public speaking with The Eloquent Woman. Follow our Facebook page, read great quotes from eloquent woman on Pinterest, follow me as @dontgetcaught on Twitter or track when others tweet about the lack of women speakers on programs via @NoWomenSpeakers. Learn how to be a better panel moderator with The Eloquent Woman's Guide to Moderating Panels.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Please describe women's speeches as something other than 'emotional'

Maybe it's because we're coming off of a U.S. election season with a female candidate, and heading right into Hollywood awards shows, with their dozens of acceptance speeches. But I already have "emotional" fatigue--that is, I'm sick and tired of news coverage describing women's speeches as "emotional," when they are much more than that--or much less.

There are a couple of beefs wrapped up into one in that complaint. First, I object to coverage that describes women's speeches as "emotional" when they are simply not. They may be straightforward, focused, pointed speeches, but the writers can't seem to let go of the idea that the speech must be emotional if the speaker is a woman. A clear example of this was Hillary Clinton's concession speech in the 2016 presidential race. At the time, I noted:
The widespread media coverage was what we might expect for a woman candidate: Some news media insisted on describing it and her as emotional, something rarely said about male speakers even when they are emotional. Some said she was choking back tears (see if you can find said choking back--I couldn't). As The Atlantic noted in writing about the press and pundits, "They wanted to see tears. She didn’t provide them, but that didn’t make much difference."
Now, both men and women may be emotional, or unemotional, or something in between, when giving speeches. But most of the time, the speaker being described as emotional will be a woman, regardless of the actual emotional content of her speech.

My second beef comes with speeches by women that do contain emotional content. In those cases, it often seems, that guarantees coverage as an emotional speech, and nothing else. Dee Dee Myers, former press secretary to President Bill Clinton, once noted that, when women appear on television, "a bad hair day is like a virtual mute button." So is visible emotion for women speakers. Coverage goes straight to the tears or the choked-up voice, and obliterates the rest of the message.

That might mean extensive coverage of just the emotional content, leading with it, or emphasizing it in headline after headline, so that, if you read only headlines, that's all you will hear about a woman's speech. A good recent example was U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama's final speech at the White House, in which headline after headline described her in tears. As I sometimes do, I took to Twitter to complain:
What would be a better headline? On Twitter, Timor El-Dardiry sent me a good example from a Netherlands paper:
What's so bad about being emotional in a speech? Not a thing. What I'm objecting to is using "emotional" as the primary descriptor when women speak.

Sometimes, it's the event or the speaker who generates emotions in her listeners, but that doesn't make her speaking emotional, necessarily. And I suspect that many times, women's speeches are dubbed "emotional" when they are expressing anger or disagreement. A while back, I shared on the blog this article on Who gets to be angry? which noted:
When women are angry, we are wanting too much or complaining or wasting time or focusing on the wrong things or we are petty or shrill or strident or unbalanced or crazy or overly emotional. Race complicates anger. Black women are often characterized as angry simply for existing, as if anger is woven into our breath and our skin.
I'll quote classics scholar Mary Beard again, from her great speech on the public voice of women:
It is still the case that when listeners hear a female voice, they don’t hear a voice that connotes authority; or rather they have not learned how to hear authority in it...
That's what I want: Descriptions of women speakers that convey their authority, as experts, as leaders, as commentators, as CEOs, as citizens.

We can get there with descriptions that cover most of the content, rather than one moment (or a non-existent moment). In Michelle Obama's case, you could describe that speech in many ways: historic, fierce, thoughtful, inspiring. It's a great exercise, when you reflexively reach for "emotional" and are describing a woman's speech, to say to yourself, "What are the other options?"

Journalists, I'm looking at you.

The best I can say about dubbing women's speeches as emotional, time after time, is that it represents lazy writing. The worst? It's a reflection of how we see women, and not men, when they speak. Trust me, women speakers can tell when their messages are obliterated by the race to call them emotional. We can all do better than that...can't we?

Get involved in more conversations on public speaking with The Eloquent Woman. Follow our Facebook page, read great quotes from eloquent woman on Pinterest, follow me as @dontgetcaught on Twitter or track when others tweet about the lack of women speakers on programs via @NoWomenSpeakers. Learn how to be a better panel moderator with The Eloquent Woman's Guide to Moderating Panels.