Language can be used to gain power and influence over others, since words are powerful and have a way of making us act and think in a certain way. Gender is, consciously or unconsciously, evident in the way we speak. As Eckert and McConnell-Ginet (2003, p. 9) state, gender is embedded in our institutions, actions, beliefs and desires. Gendered language often strengthens implicit biases, and gender exclusive language is an example of it. Staut and Nasgupta (2010, p. 758) define gender exclusive language as using words and terms that refer to one gender only, thus neglecting the other, when talking about both women and men. In my opinion, gender exclusive language can be harmful to our worldview, because it affects the way we see the world and how we perceive other people and their gender. In addition, we are not always even aware of gendered language.
We learn to talk and listen to other people at an early age. We learn to interact with people orally before we can, for example, read and write. Thus, everything that is said or heard throughout our lifetime has an effect on us. Unfortunately, this can have negative effects. As a child, one does not have a critical way of thinking, so if someone is constantly using terms with a male bias, such as “fireman” instead of “firefighter”, it will be embedded in a young listener’s mind. As they grow older, they use these kinds of masculine forms and terms, which will only add a male bias to the concepts.
I believe that this kind of usage of gender exclusive language is unequal and socially harmful. For instance, if gender exclusive language is used in job advertisements, it creates a barrier between different kinds of candidates. If a company is looking for a “chairman”, it instantly evokes an image that the undefined person that the company is looking for is a man. Although, even if the advertisement stated that all applicants are free to apply equally, it makes you wonder the reasons behind using a certain kind of wording.
So, why are we not using bias-free language or trying to reduce a male bias in language? Is it because the changes would take a long time and a vast amount of resources, if authorised publications, and the like, were to be revised? I think that the change is necessary, and we should realise that although it will take some time and effort, changes need to be made. For instance, why do we still address heads of state by stating their gender somehow (e.g. Mr./Mrs. President)? Why cannot we acknowledge them by using only bias-free utterances, such as “the Honourable President”?
Lindqvist et al. (2018) have examined a male bias in language. They have discussed how said bias could be reduced in language. They believe that the usage of gender-fair language could be some kind of a solution to the problem that an undefined person is often thought of as a man (Lindqvist et al., 2018, p. 109). Their research shows that newly created gender-neutral terms, such as using the pronoun “ze” instead of the pronouns he and she, seem to reduce a male bias in language. However, in their research, the traditional words that had not been newly created, often had a male bias. (Lindqvist et al., 2018, p. 114). In my opinion, the norms of professional titles are often perceived as male. For example, in news articles, it is always mentioned, if someone is a woman. I cannot help but notice that “women’s football” is mentioned in the articles concerning this sport instead of just discussing “football”. If we are aware of gender-biased language, why do journalists, for instance, still emphasise genders in their texts?
However, fortunately, changes are evident. Governments, NGOs and the like have acknowledged the problem and are increasingly using bias-free language in their publications and statements. For example, the European Parliament emphasises that it is committed to gender equality, and one way of implementing it is to use gender-sensitive language (the European Parliament, 2018).
We also need to remember that new gender-neutral terms are not always only affecting gender bias. For example, professional titles may contain different kinds of values based on their new wording, since connotations are formed differently with different concepts. For instance, the gender-neutral term “firefighter” emphasises the complexity of a task, whereas another gender-neutral term “(security/police) officer” does not offer any kind of characterisation for the profession.
References
Eckert P. and McConnell-Ginet S., 2003. Language and Gender. Cambridge University Press.
The European Parliament, 2018. Gender-neutral language in the European Parliament. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/cmsdata/151780/GNL_Guidelines_EN.pdf.[Accessed 10.10.2019].
Lindqvist A., Renström E. A. and Gustafsson Sendén M., 2018.Reducing a Male Bias in Language? Establishing the Efficiency of Three Different Gender-Fair Language Strategies. Published online: 16 October 2018.
Stout J. G.and Nasgupta N., 2010. When He Doesn’t Mean You: Gender-Exclusive Language as Ostracism. Published online: 17 December 2010.