Linguistic Sexism
By Erica Liu
Language is a powerful tool. It’s what sets human beings apart from our animal counterparts. However, parts of our language are still fundamentally flawed: it also sets human beings apart from each other. The English language, in particular, exhibits built-in sexism. In recognizing and addressing these linguistic biases, we can contribute to a more inclusive language that reflects the diversities of the human experience.
The utilization of female versions of male words in English presents a challenge that extends beyond just grammar. This practice not only reflects historical gender norms but also presents a form of linguistic inequality. Examining the implications of such linguistic choices unveils a deeper societal issue, as it reinforces traditional gender roles in both language and broader cultural contexts. For example, one may trust a “doctor” with a person’s life, but when it becomes a “doctress,” the said physician suddenly loses credibility. This subtle bias may play into more common words as well. The difference between an “actor/actress” and “priest/priestess” is that the words ending with “-ess” are considered less “trustworthy” and less “serious” in their jobs. Another harmful aspect of female versions of male words is that they often become derogatory. For example, “master” gives off a powerful vibe, but “mistress,” which is supposedly the female version of master, has a dishonorable secondary meaning of “a woman having an extramarital sexual relationship, especially with a married man” (Oxford Languages). Addressing the problematic nature of linguistic sexism becomes a crucial step toward equality through language and promoting a more inclusive society.
As we delve into the complexities of linguistic bias, it is also important to explore our own predispositions. The following exercise tests gender-inclusiveness and whether we unknowingly harbor linguistic biases in our everyday communication:
“A father and son get in a car crash and are rushed to the hospital. The father dies. The boy is taken to the operating room and the surgeon says, “I can’t operate on this boy, because he’s my son.” How is this possible?
According to a study, about 40-75% of people cannot solve this riddle because they’re unable to imagine that the surgeon is a woman. The surgeon is the boy’s mother.
Beyond a mere linguistic preference, employing gender-inclusive language is a powerful tool for fostering equality, breaking free from traditional gender stereotypes, and promoting a more respectful environment. It’s always better to use words that avoid bias towards a particular sex. For example, words such as “chairman” contain the component “-man.” Yet, women are also entirely capable of holding such positions. Using the term chairperson means the same but also demonstrates inclusion of all people, regardless of biological gender.
In analyzing the English language, we've unveiled the subtle biases within, from the problems arising from female versions of male words to reflecting on our own linguistic predispositions. Language is not merely a means of communication–it can influence societal attitudes. By acknowledging linguistic biases and striving for gender-inclusive language use, we can work toward a more welcoming environment for everyone, regardless of gender.