Being called “bossy” was a hallmark in my coming-of-age journey insofar as it created distinct impressions on how I interacted with authority and power. I got to thinking: it can’t just be me, can it? It turns out that there’s actually recently surging discourse on the gender-based implications of language; particularly that applies to young women and their entrance into positions of power and authority. Who could have thought that all these years of backtracking my fears of authority could be rooted in some hallmarked experience of girlhood? Who could have thought that “bossy” could do so much harm?
“Bossy,” stemming from the Dutch-rooted word “boss,” has a surprisingly different connotation from the latter. “Boss” simply refers to a natural hierarchy of authority to which those underneath are subject to; i.e., not necessarily negative and rather represents a figurehead of an inner circle of employees. With synonyms like “director,” “head,” and “leader,” the word seems to suggest a positive image of power insofar as it is held in high esteem (to whom?) and sought after (by whom?). However, “bossy” is described as the fondness of having authority and its weaponization to give orders. With synonyms such as “domineering,” “overbearing,” and “imperious,” the word “bossy” seems far from neutral like its stem might suggest.
My quiet but not too quiet questions of “who?” are imperative to this discussion… Who is it really that has historically decided the hierarchy within educational, corporate, and political spheres? I fear that the answer to this question is given by taking a look at the overwhelming demographic of U.S. presidents over history… and probably your closest office building too. With this said, the reconstruction that things like DEI have done for our systems of corporate function have done the gritty work in increasing access and exposure to such positions of power (AKA “the boss”) that would otherwise fall short in previous systems. The grit still appears despite it all — in grainy crumbs littered in sentences that don’t sit right: “bossy.”
Women are twice as likely to be called “bossy” in a position of power than a male counterpart according to the Center for Creative Leadership. And while she may quite literally be the boss, (or better said; leader, head, director), this gender-based language of “bossy” facilitates yet another emotional and strategic barrier for women to cross insofar as it re-establishes prehistoric gender norms from when women were fighting the fight to get to the top, and the discouragement they received from particularly white, cis-gendered men. “Bossy” implies, to me, a self-righteous, cruel, and dominant persona attached to the person who is being called. However, these associations cause me to wonder if those who have ever called a woman bossy have ever stopped to think that maybe they are attempting to fill the wrong, out-dated shoes? That women are perhaps making up for lost time, or putting on their own persona of those that have held themselves dominant over the corporate sphere since its origin? If she’s even power-hungry at all (and in my opinion, maybe she should be).
I digress; “bossy” is nothing short of malicious, gendered language that has creeped its way through the fine prints of our laws, regulations, inclusivity statements, and emotional attachments to the work that we do. Sitting here, I come to interact with the tangibility that is the fear that I possess in relation to holding authority, and I cannot say that I am surprised. “Bossy” needs to leave our dominant language, and further than this, women need to continue entering positions of power despite this fear, and do so with grace, talent, femininity, and a desire for change to wipe the “y” clear off of “bossy” so that we too are wholly perceived as “leaders.”