20 Gender-neutral language
There is an increasing focus upon the way language still reflects millennia-old prejudices against women. Pronouns are one area where writers are having some difficulty coming to a consensus.
For a long time, and still persisting today, there has been the idea that the masuline pronouns, like
Such use has been prevalent among religious, political and academic circles for millennia. However, such circles had been conspicuous by their exclusion of women, and so had been able to propagate such masculine-centric language because there has been no opposition within their ranks that may have objected. It is easy to say the masculine usage is universal when only men count! As women gradually began to be allowed into some of these institutions, they were in a precarious minority, and so were disinclined to buck the status quo over what would have been the least of their issues.
However, as reading became more popular among the general population, the heavy biases in language permeated into all written material. We have come to a point where women, and many men, rightly question whether the language needs to reflect what everyday people understand by them, as opposed to the lofty but prejudicial interpretations of religious and academic scholars.
This discussion is separate from what an individual prefers to be referred to as, but in general using gender-neutral language should suffice to prevent erroneous gender assumptions in the reader when writing about a person. The same principle of avoiding setting up gender-based expectations about a person that may not be applicable to the context applies.
Is it valid to use maculine pronouns?△
The first question is whether masculine pronouns are suitable as gender-neutral references.
We have become fairly used to seeing masculine pronouns used to generically refer to people in various occupations or activities, but does their use set up gender expectations in people hearing and reading them?
What about those situations where the gender is unknown to one party in a conversation?
When you asked your doctor about the pains in your abdomen, what did he say?, but they are actually female, would you:
Another example is if I said to you Look at that runner go. He's really moving!
and you turned around to see a solitary female runner, would you accept that she was who I was talking about, or look around for a male runner?
A lot will probably depend upon which gender you are, and what conventions you are used to, but it does highlight the situations where we are using language that does not reflect the assumptions we are making. If you are the type of person who would have been looking for the male runner, you would be more likely to visualise someone described as a doctor or engineer as male when you read about them being referenced by the supposedly neutral he.
Given that there is so much correctly applied use of the masculine pronouns, can we really expect that they can also do double-duty as gender-neutral forms as well? I say increasingly not, as less people are being trained in the conventions through the traditional institutions that perpetrated the supposedly gender-neutral usage.
The issue is important when using pronouns when the gender is unimportant or irrelevant, so as to not set up an unnecessary or misleading expectation or perspective. However, if the intent is to convey that the person being spoken about is actually male, then the masculine pronouns are entirely appropriate. Decoupling the masculine pronouns from doing double-duty would eliminate confusion in interpreting what is meant when the masculine pronouns are used. To avoid playing into prejudices that the person being talked to may have, preferably use gender-neutral terms even if the gender is known.
Identity△
Pursuance of gender-neutral language is often seen as of lesser importance than other issues, but it goes to the heart of how prevalent thinking in society suppresses the aspirations of its members.
We are in a time where gender is no longer just a biological factor determined at birth, but an active psychological state of mind that we may choose or just feel is the default way we see ourselves, so we have become more aware of how we can be locked into thinking, attitudes and actions that are not what we really want for ourselves. It is all part of understanding who we are as individuals, and what part we can play in society.
People are claiming the language that they want to describe themselves, as evidenced by the plethora of new words added to the language as a result of user-generated content on social media sites. Language is no longer the preserve of nominated custodians, but has evolved into its own democratic forms of expression. As writers, we can facilitate a less biased and prescriptive narrative, by eliminating irrelevent or misleading gender references.
There is a difference between what is used as a default pronounal reference, and what is a personal preference in how to be addressed as an individual. This article is about making a default that does not lead to biased perceptions. However, just because a person may express a preference for gendered pronouns should not mean that using a gender-neutral pronoun is disrespectful, just as referring to someone as a person rather than as a man or woman is not, because the gender-neutral pronoun is the stand-in for exactly that situation.
Approaches△
As writers became aware of the unnecessary biases in the traditional third-person pronouns, attempts have been made to move to more neutral usage.
| # | Approach | Example | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| a | Masculine | Ask your doctor for his advice | Traditional, but biased |
| b | Both | Do what he or she says | Klunky, and can disrupt reading or listening flow |
| c | Alternation | Listen to what he says … follow her example | Leads to confusion of subject of reference |
| d | Plural | Listen to your manager and follow their instructions | Singular is implied by the context |
The middle two are halfway attempts because they do not deal with the real issue that there does not need to be any gender reference at all. The last is just the application of a convention that is already established for second person usage of the plural forms you and yours. Determination of cardinality (how many it applies to) is given by the subject, explicit or implied, of the pronoun reference.
Of course, we could make up some new singular third-person pronouns, but since there was no effort in the last half century to replace the old second-person singular pronouns of thou and thee, there is unlikely to be any attempt to do so.
Confusion?△
There is a risk of confusion when both the subject and object groups or individuals are referred to by pronouns.
To a certain extent, we have relied upon there being distinct pronouns when discussing an individual interacting with an individual or group, especially if the former could be identified as a particular gender. Reducing the number of pronouns to just
Another way of reducing confusion is to use names when relating the two parties, and then reverting to using a pronoun for one of the parties. For a group, it could be their formal identity name, or using a relevant descriptor that defines their role. The goal is to not force use of pronouns if it can lead to confusion, but revert to them when the narrative has established who is to be featured from then on. When wanting to then refer to the other party, use their name or descriptor to disambiguate them, either for an incidental mention, or to change the narrative to focus on them.
If more than two parties, avoid using pronouns unless the narrative is to focus on only one of them for a time. Pronouns are optimal when talking about only one party after their identity has been established, so use the narrative to take one party's point of view. If wanting to appear fair, then use their names and avoid pronouns unless it is for an unambiguous reference to one of them in the same sentence. Pronouns are not compulsory, though they do help avoid excessively repeating a name, but use them only when it is clear as to whom they refer.
Recommendation△
I think that there is only one approach that is practical and already has precedent.
I recommend using the plural third-person pronouns of