This is a bit of a rhetorical question, as I think most people would probably agree that we do!

More probing questions you may wish to consider are:

Have women’s voices got deeper in recent years?

Do women find it hard to carry authority in their voices?

Do women talk more than men?

Do men use language to put women down?

What is the ‘ideal’ female voice from an advertiser’s viewpoint?

Are there really big differences between men and women’s brains in terms of how they process language?

These were all questions discussed in this morning’s Woman’s Hour in an interview with Deborah Cameron, Professor of Language and Communication, University of Oxford, and Professor Sophie Scott from the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, prior to a conference this Sunday at the Institute of Contemporary Arts entitled ‘Our Speaking Selves’.

The half-day conference sounds absolutely fascinating – particularly the bit where they demo how ’stuttering’ can be induced in normally fluent talkers, by playing their own speech back to them when they are reading aloud – but I won’t be able to make it, as I’ll be around the corner at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, where I’ll be co-presenting with Sarah Dillon at the ITI Conference (set to be equally fascinating!).

A debate is currently raging across the British media concerning this news story, and the wider issue of new mums of all ages and social statuses who for whatever reason decide to return to work rather more quickly than is ‘normal’. Most new mums are entitled to at least 3 months’ leave following the birth of their child (except freelancers, of course – how long we choose to take it entirely at our own discretion, or rather, how long we can survive on the state Maternity Allowance).

The Guardian encouraged a debate on the issue, with numerous writers (all women, I might add) being very forthcoming with their views on Dati’s decision regarding her newborn. I began reading the comments with a fairly neutral attitude. But, as I read on, I found myself  forming a much stronger opinion…but not the one I expected.

Contrast this view of one writer:

Dati is someone who has a serious job to do and it really doesn’t matter whether she’s postnatally flabby or annoyingly thin when she does it. It’s not unsisterly to be slim and it doesn’t make you unfit for public service. As for the health consequences of going back to work so soon, it’s not as if she is a hod carrier, or a firefighter, or a teacher – she’s a government minister and if she feels up to sitting down at a desk and attending meetings shortly after giving birth, bonne chance to her

With this one:

Then there was the businesswoman who spent her labour on her Blackberry because she didn’t want to look like “a slacker”.  I’ve also spoken to despairing midwives who see women missing out on the vital, once-in-a lifetime experience of bonding with their newborn.

Machismo of this sort by women in prominent positions makes others feel guilty about exercising their rights. It also deters women from striving to reach the top. There are precious few women in leading business roles and many of them are single or childless. It is easy to understand why that is if they are expected to start working almost immediately after birth.[...]  As a society, we should encourage our leaders to show that it is possible to take proper maternity leave and hold down a high-profile job.

To my surprise, my major reaction was disappointment at some of the criticism levied at mothers. Although many of the responses made some very salient points, these points risked being lost amongst the emotionally charged tone of the writing. Why does this, as women, upset us  quite so much? Why are we still hounding each other for the decisions we take in motherhood? Why do we feel that motherhood is an issue where we are all entitled to pass judgement on each other?

Sure, there are things about the way some women choose to begin motherhood that would not work for everyone, but is it really fair to haul them over hot coals for deviating from what we perceive to be ‘normal’? This particular observation really stood out:

[...] you have to wonder where feminism has taken us when women are judged because they don’t conform to the current view of what a “good mother” looks like

France has excellent maternity provision, much more generous than the UK. But in France reactions have been even stronger, especially among women’s rights organisations. A spokeswoman for one of the major women’s rights organisations in France said ‘c’est un scandale‘. This is a somewhat  misplaced agenda for a women’s rights organisation, surely.

This is such a contentious issue and feelings clearly run very deep; there aren’t many things that offend humans more than when others take issue with their parenting style.  What saddens me is that people, especially women, are so very quick to pass judgement on how other women choose to return to work after having a baby. After all, I don’t think child neglect is an issue here – we can probably quite safely assume that Ms. Dati has employed a suitable-qualified nanny.

One of the most surprising things for me in this story was that I found myself agreeing with a columnist in The Times (!). Melanie McDonagh on Friday really hit the nail on the head for me when she said: ‘[...] real women are infinitely various, their circumstances even more so.’ The debate continued in The Sunday Times today, again with some pretty reasonable and pragmatic arguments put across. I still don’t have a very strong view for or against Ms. Dati’s decision. All I hope is that soon the day will come when the image of the ‘perfect mummy’ is no longer idealised and women do not vilify each other for not conforming to it.