Blame history for all the complaints over Hillary Clinton’s voice

When you talk to critics of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, her voice is often one of their top complaints.

But why are we so focused on her voice? Is it because of the way she sounds or because of the way we listen?

It’s probably a little bit of both, according to Michelle Habell-Pallan, an associate professor of Gender, Women and Sexuality Studies at the University of Washington.

Related: Follow KIRO Radio at the Democratic National Convention

“One thing is intimate conversation, but once women become public figures and public speakers so much attention is put not just on their looks but also on the actual sound of their voice,” Habell-Pallan said.

That applies whether it’s in a college classroom, in an office or on the campaign trail. Historically, authoritative voices have qualities associated with men. They’re deep. They’re strong. They’re emotive. It’s something closer to what you hear from Republican Presidential Candidate Donald Trump, according to Habell-Pallan. Trump moves his pitch up and down, uses growling tones and other voice dynamics to create drama.

With Clinton, there’s not as much pitch change or drama. Habell-Pallan says Clinton’s voice is more “neutral” and it sounds like she has had some voice coaching.

“I think there is this kind of forcefulness behind her voice that makes her voice stand out. Or, some people might say, grate against the grain,” Habell-Pallan said.

We can thank our shared history. Even Aristotle said a woman’s voice was high and weak and had more in common with a child’s than a man’s. In Ancient Greece, women were only able to make public speeches if there were no men around. If women were outspoken, they were considered promiscuous.

While we have evolved a lot since then, Habell-Pallan believes you can still hear some remnants of those beliefs in our language.

“The way we talk about women’s voices as shrill, as too loud, as grating. Who’s voice does that describe right now? It’s not a woman necessarily,” Habell-Pallan said. And she eluded to Trump, “There’s a very public figure out there whose voice could be described in that way, and yet it’s not.”

Even as an educated professional, Habell-Pallan finds herself consciously changing her voice when she’s speaking to her students. She worries that if she speaks too high her students won’t take her seriously. If she speaks too low, students would find it strange and distracting. Women can be just as critical as men, according to Habell-Pallan, even if it happens unconsciously.

There’s really no easy solution. Habell-Pallan said it’s like the chicken and the egg. Society needs to change its perception of what an authoritative voice sounds like. In the meantime, women need to do all they can to be seen as equals.

We are slowly moving in the right direction. Habell-Pallan says hearing women use their natural voices on radio shows, for example, can show that females don’t have to emulate male voices to sound authoritative.

It will take time for more societal norms to evolve in this way. For now, Hillary Clinton will have to deal with the realities of the present and try to get her message across to an audience that might be distracted by the sound of her voice.