In today's professional communication, there is a growing trend to use gender-neutral or gender-inclusive language. This suggestion aims to eliminate societal norms and biases ingrained in language. Advocates of gender-neutral language argue that gender-specific language often implies male superiority or reflects an unequal state of society.
It is important to note that there are several examples of genderless and gender-neutral languages, such as Kartvelian languages, Armenian, Farsi, Basque, Tagalog, English, Turkish, Chinese, and Finnish. However, despite this linguistic characteristic, when examining a country's gender equality statistics, it does not necessarily translate into reduced instances of gender stereotyping and discrimination.
With the exception of Finland (the United Nations' Gender Inequality Index places Finland near the top of their lists, although below other Nordic states in their comparisons of gender equality), these aforementioned countries do not typically rank highly in terms of gender equality measures. The observation appears to challenge the assumption that language alone significantly promotes gender equality.
However, the persistent use of gender-neutral language and its impact on communication is entertaining to observe as individuals navigate gender issues. These complex struggles significantly affect communication dynamics, often acting as barriers that limit one's ability to express oneself fully.
A quote by Sheryl Sandberg recently sparked discussions about gender and language on social media. According to Sandberg: "In the future, there will be no female leaders. There will just be leaders".
Sheryl Sandberg, the former COO of Facebook, apparently has a vision for the future where leadership potential is evaluated based on qualifications and merits alone, without any consideration of gender. This would be an ideal world where gender does not play a role in determining one's leadership abilities. Ultimately, however, the question is whether, in the context of gender-neutral language, this quote actually promotes equality or inadvertently emphasises gender issues. In fact, judging by the controversial discussion on the Internet, Sandberg's comment seems to have had unintended consequences that most likely run counter to its original purpose.
While her intention to underscore the significance of female leaders was undoubtedly well-meaning, the act of highlighting a specific gender can, by implication, inadvertently lead to adverse effects in a society extremely conscious of gender differences. Such emphasis on one gender over others may perpetuate discrimination and create barriers for those who do not fit within that particular category.
The irony of this example lies in the fact that despite the English language being predominantly gender-neutral and efforts being made to alter certain words like [policemen], [firemen], [actresses], and [stewardesses] that lack neutrality, there is often an inclination to assign gender to otherwise neutral nouns such as 'leader' when trying to emphasise a point or refer to a specific group. Paradoxically, this attempt to be inclusive by specifying gender can inadvertently be perceived as discriminatory towards other groups. This highlights the challenge that arises in striving for gender-neutral communication, as it becomes problematic when one must provide distinctions without risking accusations of bias.
Language may, to a certain extent, play a role in shaping our thoughts, although it is important to recognise that simply adjusting language to cater to gender identity issues may not be a comprehensive solution. When considering the complexities of dealing with gender-specific language in English, where the constraints already can hinder communication, it becomes apparent that the challenges are even greater in languages that incorporate grammatical gender. In such languages, the impact of genderism on communication and inclusivity is magnified.
Many central European countries like France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Poland, and the Czech Republic have grammatically classified nouns as either masculine or feminine. The German and Dutch languages also feature a neuter gender category in their linguistic systems. In response to the evolving concept of gender inclusivity, countries, for example, Germany and France, have adopted unconventional linguistic constructions to adapt to the principles of gender neutrality and inclusivity. The most popular method in France is the use of the "median dot" to include both masculine and feminine, as in, Cher·e·s ami·e·s (Dear friends), which is sometimes replaced by a hyphen (cher-e-s ami-e-s), by parentheses (cher(e)s ami(e)s), or by slashes (cher/e/s ami/e/s). It is the asterisk in Germany, e.g., Schüler*innen (pupils).
These unconventional linguistic structures and characters, such as gender asterisks and gender gaps or the inline "I," are striking features in written text. Their unique appearance makes them stand out significantly, presenting a distinct challenge when attempting to incorporate them into spoken conversations. However, rather than aiding clarity, they often result in increased confusion for language learners and present challenges for individuals with dyslexia and dysphasia. Inclusive writing, while well-intentioned, can inadvertently complicate written language comprehension. The already complex German language becomes even more daunting when incorporating gendered language endings and special characters. Rather than promoting inclusivity, this approach tends to marginalise those with limited language skills. Ultimately, these linguistic complications may discourage people from engaging with written content or oral communication altogether.
This situation poignantly reminds us how complex communication has become due to genderism. Whatever happened to the mantra of keeping things simple? It is apparent that in today's society, discussions around gender have added layers of subtlety and nuance that make effective communication more challenging than ever before. The concept of genderism has introduced a new dimension to our interactions, requiring us to operate in a landscape filled with diverse identities, perspectives, and sensitivities.
The true meaning of language lies in the connotations and associations we give to specific words. As time passes, the significance of words may change. However, the problem lies not in the words themselves but in how we interpret them. The gender equality of language occurs automatically when the social reality is equal. Then, both genders are also associated with the generic (masculine) form. Unfortunately, some parts of society seem to be increasingly dividing people into categories based on gender instead of acknowledging and valuing individuals for their unique abilities and strengths, regardless of gender. Gendering makes it impossible not to see gender; [rather], quite the opposite. If we truly aim to eliminate discrimination rooted in gender, it is crucial that we place a strong emphasis on education and the development of healthy self-esteem. Merely swapping out words or phrases without addressing the deeper-seated biases will not lead to any substantial progress. This approach only serves as a superficial facade, allowing society, particularly politicians, to absolve themselves of responsibility without tackling the fundamental issues at hand, such as unequal pay.
It is important to realise that genderism, the belief that gender is a social construct rather than a biological one, is not as widely accepted as one might think. In fact, 65% of the population in Germany is against it. However, some people still promote this idea without fully understanding the challenges it presents to educators and students. Additionally, implementing genderism in public life can be resource-intensive and bogs down communication by making it cumbersome and difficult to address groups without discriminating against others.
This observation becomes even more pronounced when juxtaposed with the harsh realities occurring in other parts of the world, where individuals are tragically losing their lives due to conflicts and famine, women are being coerced into marriage against their will or genitally mutilated, and members of the LGBTQ+ community are facing severe discrimination and violence. It is against this backdrop of dire circumstances that the discussion surrounding genderism can be viewed as a luxury - a diversion from the more pressing and life-threatening issues that demand immediate attention and action. Only by acknowledging and addressing these critical global challenges may we be able to strive towards creating a more just and equitable society for all instead of meddling with language.