We can talk about language and sexism till the cows come home. It is pretty sexist that women are asked to declare their marriage status through honorifics like ‘Miss’,‘Mrs’ and ‘Ms’, while ‘Mr’ has no such implication. Think of how many professions take the ‘man’ suffix (policeman, spokesman, firemen).Then there’s air hostesses and male nurses, woman MPs, woman drivers, all which either sex can do and doesn’t need to be made gender-centric. Why is male always the default setting? In French, even if a group of women includes one man, the gender is still masculine. In German, a young girl is given no gender, while a turnip is denoted as female. Now that there are more than 63 genders, Mx, Ind, M, Mre, Msr, Myr, Pr, Sai, Ser or Misc being some of them, we need to be especially mindful of how we refer to people. If we want true gender equality then we should start to look at the things that perpetuate inequality, language being one of them. Because language is a powerful tool, and we should use it to encourage inclusivity. ‘Language isn’t everything when it comes to equality – if it was, then countries where nongendered languages are spoken would automatically be more equal than, say, Spain, Poland or Germany’ says Elin Asklov, project manager at language app Babbel. ‘But still, gendered languages definitely come with some problems regarding inclusion: can a woman or non-binary person really be sure that they are included in a statement with the generic “he”? ‘And does male-centricism in society reproduce itself when we keep referring to everyone with masculine forms, like in German or French? ‘In Sweden, where I come from, a made-up, non-gendered pronoun – hen- has become really popular in media, academia and everyday speech. ‘Much like the English “they”, it’s used for generic statements like “If an employee wants a pay rise, they should speak to their manager” as well as for people who don’t identify as either male or female. ‘The success story of “hen” shows that many people see it as a practical means of inclusion.’ Thankfully, gender is now regarded as a fluid concept, meaning that the binary endings given to adjectives such as ‘waiter’ and ‘waitress’ (and more) are now becoming the subject of debate. This binary way of thinking is traditionally taught to children in schools and most of us grow up not thinking about how our everyday speech propagates inequality.Just as it has historically stopped women from having an equal ranking as men (something we still haven’t achieved), language can also be exclusive towards the LGBTQ community. Male is so often the default setting, that even God is mostly referred to as He and humanity as mankind. It’s interesting to look at how different gendered languages try to tackle language inclusion. To achieve inclusion and equality in text form, many Germans have started to add an asterisk or an underscore between the male form and the female ending, as in Polizist*in or Polizist_in (policeman/woman). In written French, they’ve started writing inclusive forms with dots, as in as in un.e acteur.rice. But all of this is difficult to reproduce in spoken language. Laura Marshall, a doctoral researcher at University College London, who goes by they/them pronouns told Metro.co.uk how recognising different genders is crucial to equality. 'It is easy for privilege to obscure power of language and its use as a tool of oppression,’ she explained. ‘When it comes to pronouns, misgendering a person means refusing or failing to recognise the gender a person knows themselves to be (and not be). ‘Using “they” pronouns in a new way takes conscious effort and mistake happen but this effort is tiny compared to the hurt that misgendering can cause. Deliberately misgendering someone can be seen as a form of violence with very real consequences for mental health and emotional wellbeing. ‘Gender equality cannot be achieved without the equal recognition of non-binary people, as well as cis and trans men and women. ‘Eris Young, who identifies as nonbinary but is considering using genderqueer, told us: ‘Language is used to both uphold and undermine power structures, and it can be used to harm people, for example using the wrong pronoun to refer to a non-binary person. ‘Nonbinary and genderqueer people exist linguistically in a liminal area, and very often bend the rules of language to suit our own needs. When we move in our own communities we learn to be both mindful and innovative with our own use of language, and in this way, I think the movement towards genderless language will be led by gender-variant people.’ So how can it be changed? While the singular ‘they’ (when you don’t know the gender of a person) was looked down on by language snobs, it’s now a pretty apt way of referring to someone who doesn’t want to be labelled a certain way, if at all. ‘They’ pronouns might actually be the most accepted form of progressive language. But we certainly need more. Sweden has recently introduced a neutral personal pronoun ‘hen’ as an alternative to ‘he’ and ‘she’. The Canadian parliament voted to make their national anthem gender neutral. The English version ‘ze’ has yet to be completely adopted. Oxford University at least is urging its students to adopt gender the neutral term. In 2013, the Brighton and Hove City Council allowed the use of ‘Mx’ as an honorific on post, and in 2017 HSBC added it to its list of titles. Language is constantly changing and there is no ‘proper’ way of talking, so if we can change a few words here and there, and it makes a difference to a person or group, then it is indeed a small step to bigger change.
