Vocal Fry. Up-speak. Nasal. Too loud. Too high-pitched. Too quiet. Shrill.

We talk a lot about women’s voices. I have even written about the ways we can modulate our voices to appear more confident and capable. The truth is, there is scientific research that supports the fact that, “people associate low voices—which is to say the ones generally innate to men—with competence, leadership ability, and intelligence.” I can’t help but wonder, as a mentor, am I playing into a fundamentally sexist perception when I coach women to modulate their voices? Aren’t we actually just telling women to sound more like men?

Of course, Hillary Clinton is a prime example of how women’s voices are the topic of intense conversation. She wrote in her most recent book that for many years she was coached and trained to change the way she spoke so that she would be more “likeable” and would be taken seriously as a Presidential candidate. However, she noted that simultaneously, she was constantly criticized for sounding inauthentic. How could she possibly sound authentic when she’d spent years altering her voice?

I am the first to admit that I’m extremely distracted when I hear a woman using vocal fry, up-speak or using a very high-pitched tone. I do tend to think it makes them appear less serious, and I’m more inclined to listen to a women whose tone is steady and lower-pitched. This is a struggle for me – I know that by encouraging women to modulate their voices, I’m likely participating in gender bias, but am not sure how to change my perception. I would love to hear from you; do you find yourself judging a woman’s competencies based on the tone of her voice? Do you think paying attention to your speaking habits has helped you in your career? How do you feel about the ever-present conversation around women’s voices and our collective perception of traditionally more masculine voices as the ideal? Please share your comments with me – I will address some of them on my Facebook Group.