Cover not available

In:Discourse, Politics and Women as Global Leaders
Edited by John Wilson and Diana Boxer
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 63] 2015
► pp. 21–42

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 1. “Why can’t a woman be more like a man?”

Margaret Thatcher and the discourse of leadership

 | School of Communication, University of Ulster
 | School of Communication, University of Ulster
Published online: 30 October 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.63.02wil
Margaret Thatcher was the first woman to become Prime Minister of the UK. It has been claimed, however, that she did little for the cause of women. Part of the problem is Thatcher made clear that while she was a woman she thought of herself as a politician first. In this chapter we consider the linguistic consequences of adopting such a position, and we argue that Thatcher used specific discourse structures conducive to the adversarial style of the British parliament. As this style has been equated with male discourse patterns some argue that Thatcher adopted male linguistic norms. However, adversarial styles are not inherently “male” and we consider whether Thatcher was speaking like a man or merely as a politician.
References (44)
References
Aries, E. 1987. “Gender and Communication.” In Sex and Gender. Review of Personality and Social Psychology Volume 7, edited by Philip Shaver and Clyde Hendrick, 149-176. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beattie, G.W. 1982. “Turn-taking and Interruption in Political Interviews: Margaret Thatcher and Jim Callaghan Compared and Contrasted.” Semiotica 39(1/2): 93-114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beattie, G.W., A. Cutler, and M. Pearson. 1982. “Why is Mrs Thatcher Interrupted So Often?” Nature 300: 744-747. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bem, S. 1974. “The Measurement of Psychological Androgyny.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 42(2): 155-162. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bochel, C. and J. Briggs. 2000. “Do Women Make A Difference?” Politics 20(2): 63–68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, P. and S. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bull, P. and K. Mayer. 1988. “Interruptions in Political Interviews: A Study of Margaret Thatcher and Neil Kinnock.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 7(1): 35-46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Catalano, A. 2009. “Women Acting for Women? An Analysis of Gender and Debate Participation in the British House of Commons 2005-2007.” Politics & Gender 5(1): 45-68. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Childs, S. 2000. “The New Labour Women MPs in the 1997 British Parliament.” Women’s History Review 9(1): 55–73. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. “A Feminised Style of Politics? Women MPs in the House of Commons.” British Jounral of Politics and International Relations 6(1): 3-19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coates, J. 2003. “The Role of Epistemic Modality in Women’s Talk.” In Modality in Contemporary English, edited by Facchinetti, Roberta, Manfred Krug, and Frank Palmer, 331-348. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dunleavy, P., G.W. Jones, and B. O'Leary. 1990. “Prime Ministers and the Commons: Patterns of Behaviour, 1868-1987.” Public Administration 68(1): 123-140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eckert, P. 2008. “Variation and the Indexical Field.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(4): 453–476. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eckert, P. and S. McConnell-Ginet. 1992. “Communities of Practice: Where Language, Gender, and Power all Live.” In Locating Power. Proceedings of the 1992 Berkeley Women and Language conference, edited by K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, and B. Moonwomon, 89-99. Berkeley: Berkeley Women and Language Group.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Graddol, D. and J. Swann. 1989. Gender Voices. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, S. 2001. “Being Politically Impolite: Extending Politeness Theory to Adversarial Political Discourse.” Discourse & Society 12(4): 451-472. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Henderson, Alisa. 2005. “Forging a New Political Culture: Plenary Behaviour in the Scottish Parliament.” Journal of Legislative Studies 11(2): 275–301. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, J. 1995. Women, Men and Politeness. London and New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, J. and M. Meyerhoff. 1999. “The Community of Practice: Theories and Methodologies in Language and Gender Research.” Language in Society 28(2): 173-183 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jalalzai, F. 2004. “Women Political Leaders Past and Present.” Women & Politics 26(3-4): 85-108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Madam President: Gender, Power, and the Comparative Presidency.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 31(2): 132-165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klofstad, C.A., R.C. Anderson, and S. Peters. 2012. “Sounds Like a Winner: Voice Pitch Influences Perception of Leadership Capacity in Both Men and Women.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 279(1738): 2698-2704. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knight, M. 1992. “Gender Interference in Transsexuals’ Speech.” In Locating Power. Proceedings of the 1992 Berkeley Women and Language Conference, edited by K. Hall, M. Bucholtz, and B. Moonwomon, 312-317. Berkeley: Berkeley Women and Language Group.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuiper, Koenraad. 1991. “Sporting Formulae in New Zealand English: Two Models of Male Solidarity.” In English Around the World: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, edited by Jenny Cheshire, 200-212. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, William, ed. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. 1973. “Language and Women’s Place.” Language in Society 2(1): 45-80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
., ed. 1990. Talking Power: The Politics of Language. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lave, Jean and Etienne Wenger, eds. 1992. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mackay, Fiona, ed. 2001. Love and Politics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norris, P. 1996. “Women Politicians: Transforming Westminster?” In Women in Politics, edited by J. Lovenduski and P. Norris, 91-104. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Barr, W.M. and J.F. O’Barr. 1982. Linguistic Evidence: Language, Power and Strategy in the Courtroom. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ochs, E. 1992. “Indexing Gender.” In Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, edited by A. Duranti and C. Goodwin, 335-358. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perez de Ayala, S. 2001. “FTAs and Erskine May: Conflicting Needs? – Politeness in Question Time.” Journal of Pragmatics 33(2): 143-169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosenblum, K.E. 1986. “Revelatory or Purposive? Making Sense of a ‘Female Register.’” Semiotica 59: 157-170. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ross, K. 2001. “Women’s Place in ‘Male’ Space: Gender and Effect in Parliamentary Contexts.” Parliamentary Affairs 55(1): 189-201. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1968. “A Simplest Systematics For the Organization of Turn Taking in Conversation.” Langauge 50(4): 696-735. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sandberg, Sheryl, ed. 2013. Lean In. New York: Random House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shaw, S. 2000. “Language, Gender and Floor Apportionment in Political Debates.” Discourse & Society 11(3): 401-418. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swann, J. 1992. Girls, Boys and Language. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thatcher, M. 2013. Margaret Thatcher: The Autobiography. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Bezooijen, R. 1995. “Sociocultural Aspects of Pitch Differences Between Japanese and Dutch Women.” Language and Speech 38(3): 253-265.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weatherall, A. 2002. “Towards Understanding Gender and Talk-in- interaction.” Discourse & Society 13(6): 767-781. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Chałupnik, Małgorzata, Jai Mackenzie, Louise Mullany & Sara Vilar-Lluch
2025. ‘Can women have it all?’ Transitions in media representations of Jacinda Ardern’s leadership and identity by a global newsroom. Critical Discourse Studies 22:6 ► pp. 703 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue