form and content

hear the two ladies sitting at that nearby table? they're twenty-eight or so and haven't seen each other in a while. so it's loud, rapid-speed shrieks and giggles and omigods galore. more notable, however, is the healthy dose of uptalk, vocal fry and the ever-prolific like. and by "healthy" i mean "mortifying." making statements sound like questions -- i'm neeervous about the interview? but, like, i'm not superworried? -- contributes nicely to narrowing the gap between women/gay men and the Triple-S (shallow-stupid-spoiled) stereotypes associated with the likes (get it?) of Miss America competitors, Jessica and Elizabeth Wakefield, and Paris Hilton. (apparently, hetero-identified guys also use these speech tactics. guess i've just never heard it.)

here's the surprise twist, though: as the two women continue talking, i learn that one of them is a UC berkeley grad student and the other's clerking at the supreme court of canada. *rimshot* please see previous discussions about the unfairness of jumping to certain conclusions, but people in these positions don't tend to be dipsticks. and, indeed, the content of their conversation seems to indicate that they're very bright. so what's with the way they talk? i guess "legally blonde" has effectively jumped off the movie screen and into the real-life courtroom (among other workplaces). yikes! who would want to hire Clerky as their lawyer? as far as professional credibility goes, if she's gonna talk like that, she might as well show up to court wearing jogging pants. or -- what the hell -- a bustier (BOO-stee-yay)! after all, what could possibly go better with those gravelly vocal tones than well-presented cleavage?

















and now back to translating...