Gender-fair Language

Language and Gender Relations

Language is a potent tool for how humans understand and participate in the world. It can shape
how we see society. It is a part of culture. In this regard, language is not a neutral force; it
enforces certain ideas about people including gender.

Many gendered assumptions are present when it comes to language. Language defines men
and women differently as seen in common adjectives associated with these genders. Unequal
relations can stem from statements that trivialize one gender’s experience or perpetuate one
gender’s supremacy. It evaluates gender, insomuch as language trivializes or devalues certain
characteristics. Thelma Kintanar and Angela Tongson, in their 2014 book Gender-fair Language:
A Primer, focused on three aspects of language that inform how gender is shaped-language
articulates consciousness, reflects culture, and affects socialization. Like gender stereotyping,
language influences how one sees his or her gender and perceives other people’s gender.

Violations of Gender-fair Language

Sexist language is a tool that reinforces unequal gender relations through sex-role stereotypes,
microaggressions, and sexual harassment. Language can be used to abuse, such as in the case
of sexual harassment, or to perpetuate stereotypes. It can form subtle messages that reinforce
unfair relations unfair relations, such as how “men cannot take care of children” or “women
cannot be engineers” which may impact how one views his or her significant role in how one
perceives the world. Kintanar and Tongson gave extensive examples of these violations in her
book. The following are condensed version and real – life examples of violations of gender – fair
language.

Invisibilization of Women

The invisibilization of women is rooted in the assumption that men are dominant and are the
norm of the fullness of humanity, and women do not exist. Some obvious examples of women
invisibilization in language are:

 The generic use of masculine pronouns or the use of a masculine general. The use of
the word “mankind” assumes that men are representative of all people on this planet, and that
women’s presence or roles are not acknowledged. Similarly, saying “guys” when referring to a
mixed – gender group assumes that girls are invisible, and calls attention to the male gender,
giving them a stronger presence.
 The assumption that certain function or jobs are performed by men instead of both
genders. For example, the sentences “The Farmers and their wives tilled the land.” Or “The
politicians and their wives lobbied for change.” Assume that men can have jobs as farmers and
politicians, and women who do the same work are still made to be known as wives, with their
identities forever linked to being married to their husband.
 The use of male job titles or terms ending in man to refer to functions that may be
given to both genders. For instance, the titles “businessman” and “chairman” assume that all
businessmen or chairmen are men and that certain jobs may not be for women, which is not
true.

Trivialization of Women

 Bringing attention to the gender a person, if that person is a woman. The use of lady
”,“ girl or “woman” along with the noun brings attention to the gender of the person rather
than to the job of functions. Examples of these include “girl athlete”, ”woman doctor,” “lady
guard”, and “working wives”. This notion also works for men who enter traditionally female
jobs such as “,male nurses,””male nannies”, or “male secretaries”.
 The perception of women as immature. Women may be labeled as “darling” or
“baby” by those who do not know them, making them appear childlike or juvenile.
 The objectification or likening to objects, of women. By being called “honey”,
“sweets,”or “chick,” women become devalued, especially if they are in environment that merits
formality such as the workplace.

Fostering unequal relations

Language that lacks parallelism fosters unequal gender relations. The use of “man and wife”
assumes that men are still men and women’s identities are subsumed and shifted beings in
relation to their husbands.

Gender polarization of words in use of adjectives The personal care brand Dove recently came
out with an advertisement that used parallel adjectives to show the difference in perception
regarding men and women. Both men and women did the same activity, but were described
differently. In the ad, men who took the lead were considered the “boss,” while women who
had the same initiative were considered “bossy.” Men who worked overtime were seen as
“providers,” while women did the same were seen as “uncaring.” This polarization of adjectives
show hoe perception does change how one sees certain acts, depending who performs them.

Hidden assumptions
Hidden assumptions in sentences can also be form of microaggression if the underlying
perceptions are sexist and degrading. For example, the statement, “The father is baby-sitting
his children.” Assumes that the father is not a caregiver, and that any attempts he has at
parenting is temporary as the mother is the main caregiver. A typical example of a situation
involving sexist language is shown in the following sample caser.

Aaron mentioned that his friends from his all – boys high school; would often use the word “bakla” as
an insult. They would also use bakla to describe someone who lost at games or was weak at sports.
He stopped doing this in college. He shared that he already “grew up”, and stopped using terms like
bakla as insults because he knows that doing so may hurt someone who is actually gay. Perhaps,
Aaron sees gender sensitivity in language as a sign of maturity.

Philippine Culture and Language

Filipino or Tagalog is mainly gender – neutral, without gendered characteristics or titles for men
and women. Words that are gendered came from another culture, which were adopted after
400 years of colonization. The values and the shaping of the education system were influenced
by Western powers and ideals. Filipinos portray a mix of identities, an infusion of both native
and foreign perspective and values.

Identities and Naming Things

The previous chapter defined sex and gender, and explained how these points can help reflect
one’s identity. Language is used to define what is feminine, masculine, and outside feminine or
masculine. It is a tool for understanding the world as well as for naming and describing people
and things. Language gives a person the power to define oneself and the external world and
one’s place in it. It provides a definition of others as well, and one’s relationship with them.
Through language, people can reflect on their own gendered identities, and battle the
definitions society imposes on them.

Naming things give them power. For example, sexual harassment was never seen as an issue as
it was never given a name. It was unwanted behavior in the workplace, but was seen as
something that could not be contended with. Because it was unnamed, it was ignored by those
in power as if it did not exists. Recognizing harassment for what it is – by defining and
describing the act – helped women around the world put mechanism that would address
workplace harassment. Similarly, women who experienced date rape had no term to describe
what occurred to them, but naming their experience helped them come to terms with their
issues.

Another example of “the problem that has no name” was given by Betty Frieden in her book,
The Feminine Mystique, in 1963. Friedan described it as the discontent that middle – class
housewives felt in the United States during the 1950s to the 1960s. in naming the issue that her
fellow housewives felt, Frieden was able to highlight the structural oppression experienced by
housewives, that despite their basic needs being met, they themselves were unable to take
control of their lives due to the limits the society enforces on their reproductive roles.

Sexist Language and Culture

A previous chapter noted that gender socialization is the process in which roles are learned.
Language that admonishes certain acts depending on one’s gender is a form of externalized
social control. Common themes of a sexist language are the commercialization and the
trivialization of women. These sexists’ portrayals of women extend to the advertising industry,
entertainment industry, and the arts. The normalization of sexism makes violence against
women and children acceptable or tolerable. Using language for gender stereotyping can
contribute to sexism by reinforcing the idea that certain words and traits should only be
associated with specific genders.

How people related to each other on a day – to – day basis reinforces behavior, both positive
and negative. To call someone stupid everyday could have an effect on his or her potential. In
turn, language through its repetition of roles, stereotypes, and adjectives affects how one
person’s enacts his or her capabilities. Constantly mocking or joking about women/LGBT,
sexualizing them, and making them appear weak would indeed make them internalize these
ideas.

That being said, language is not inherently sexist. Being sexists depends on a specific culture.
Similarly, the attitude of a culture towards a certain gender may influence the words used,
creating sexist’s language. Language is both a symptom and a perpetrator of sexism, and is the
very telling of how a society sees a certain gender.

Toward a Gender – fair Language

The use of gender – fair language in educational institutions and the removal of sexist language
as imperative to gender – responsiveness is currently being advocated. GABRIELA (General
Assembly Binding Women for Reforms, Integrity, Equality, Leadership, and Action) Women’s
Party national president and party – list representative Liza Maza called for a ban of sexist
language in all official communication and documents in the House of Representatives. The
creation of a comprehensive gender – fair language policy and the evolution of the
effectiveness of gender – fair language in institution’s are indicators for a gender – fair language
institution. These actions are small steps one can take in ensuring that institutions are indeed
gender – fair.
Language, then, is more than just the arrangement of words. Cultures and values come from
language and vice versa. Language is also a process that represents one’s views, beliefs, and
experiences. It must be changed to reflect the changes in the world as well as to be free from
bias since words can affect how a person sees oneself and others around him or her.

Women’s Ways of Knowing

Women and the Metaphor for Silence

It was shown that femininity and masculinity are not inherent but learned. Culture plays a large
part in determining what are considered masculine or feminine traits. Likewise, individuals in
particular cultures are taught to conform to these standards. Thus, even a woman’s way of
understanding the world is affected by socialization. Women may address problems differently
or be less inclined towards certain disciplines. They may also be excluded from certain schools
of thought because of traits associated with their gender.

Western male reasoning uses image that are related to visuals, seeing, or illumination to
represent knowledge. Light as a representation of knowledge stems from Plato and his Allegory
of the Cave. In the allegory, he likened an enlightened individual to a person who leaves the
cave and is suddenly exposed to the light of the sun, which can be seen to represent
knowledge. While the common metaphor for knowledge is light, this image is not
representative of how other people, specifically women, view knowledge. A study on women by
institutions of learning showed that listening is more representative for their knowledge than
seeing. The stark difference between women and men’s ways of knowing are illustrated in the
work by Belenky et al.

Women associate silence with knowledge as they themselves are often left unheard and silent.
In the study, silence and voice were dominant themes for women-a person who had knowledge
and authority was supposed to be listened to, but women who spoke out were silenced. To be
quiet was to feel dumb, as the voice had come to represent one’s intellectual and ethical
development. To have a voice was to have a self; to have a voice was to develop a sense of
voice.

Differences in Ways of Knowing: Women and Connectedness

Women and men have different ways of knowing, judgments, forms of human development,
values, and visions of humanity and existence. The main difference between men and women
comes from upbringing and gender socialization.

The role of universal caregiving in all societies was given to women. Because of this, girls
learned to be women by copying their mothers, and boys learned to be men through a
disassociation with their mother’s role. Because young girls had their mothers as role models,
they learned through association and connectedness. Women then learned through empathy.
Men learned through the separation of the self from the other.

How Women Know

According to Belenky and colleagues, women use the following perspectives to see the world
and to understand knowledge and truth

1. Silence
2. Received knowledge: listening to the voice of others
3. Subjective knowledge: the inner voice
4. Subjective knowledge: the quest for self
5. Procedural knowledge: voice of reason
6. Procedural knowledge: separate and connected knowing
7. Constructed knowledge: integrating the voices
These perspectives comprise of five categories (silence, knowledge, subjective knowledge,
procedural knowledge, and constructed knowledge) which describe the general ways women
learn about their world and come to conclusions about truth.

Women and Silence

Silence as knowing indicates an absence of thought or reflection. Women who live in silence are
often disconnected from their families and communities due to their situation, the geographical
separation of the families from the greater community, and suffocation, all of which bring about
lack of space for constructive thought. These women usually come from families that are
abusive or violent. Their knowledge comes from authorities and focuses on their need to
survive.

Women who learn through silence lack the ability to understand abstract thought. They do not
enjoy a space for introspection given their environment while growing up, or a greater
awareness of their own mental capacity. Reflective thought, characterized by ideas that are
developed from back-and-forth communication between two people is stunted. Therefore,
there is no dialogue with the self. In summary, women do not have a voice end up having no
internal voice as well, no self-perception, and lack an identity separate from what is dictated to
them.

Received Knowledge: Listening to the voices of others

Received knowledge is developed by absorbing knowledge. Silence is still valued in this way of
knowing as the receiver must be silent to receive the knowledge transmitted. However, the
silence is not always internal. Women who learn through receiving knowledge listen to friends
and authorities, and understand what is being said enough for them to repeat the words. These
women see words as imperative to learning.

Women who learn in this manner are able to do the right thing by following the rules of
authority figures. However, those under the line of received knowledge value authority and
cannot comprehend paradoxes. If two of her authority figures have contradicting information,
the woman will not be able to distinguish which is correct. She will use arbitrary means to
decide on who is telling the truth.

Subjective knowledge: The inner voice and the quest for self

Women who learn through subjective knowledge learn to trust what is called their “inner
voice and infallible gut.” Women who utilize this form of knowledge are often those who have
awakened to the previous abuses they have suffered, or have broken off with the authority
figures they have held dear. They also realize that following rules will not make them happy.
Hence, they move from passivity to action.

Subjective knowers depend on their selves and their experience to attain truth. Logic, rhetoric,
and theory are viewed with suspicion for these tools are associated with forms of knowledge
that these women are not familiar with, or are used to discredit or debase them. Women who
fall under this category of learners use their intuition to decipher truth from fiction, as they
believe their intuition is the only thing they can trust.

Women with subjective knowledge often experience a break, a separation of self from their
previous communities that may have been harmful to them. In severing connections, these
women learn to depend on themselves and find themselves as their own authority. Because of
this break from the woman’s previous (often abusive) environment, a new quest for self is done
in relation to her new community. New connections are formed, and the woman is able to find
herself.

Procedural knowledge: Voice of reason and separate and connected knowing

Procedural knowers learn through processes. Often, the women utilizing this method have
learned well from formal systems of knowledge, enough to excel. However, they have views
that differ from what they are taught. They then use the tools they acquired from these formal
systems to defend their own worldview. Rather than moving on from subjective knowledge,
they learn to defend their beliefs and rationalize their thoughts. Women with this form of
knowledge learn the language of the experts and apply this to their own views . Those who use
procedural knowledge usually focus more on the method and less on the problem. Since the
method centers on the debate and winning, it may not allow women the space to voice out
their own concerns and bring their needs to light.

Procedural knowers believe that each person views the world differently and is entitled to his or
her own opinion. They pay attention to how different people form their views of the world. The
question “Where are they coming from?” is pivotal for them.
Understanding then comes as a vital aspects of knowing. The importance women give to
connections is reflected in how they come to learn about things. Understanding involves
acquainting oneself with the object to be known, and forming a connection with it. To
understand, as women say, there must be a form of acceptance, which is achieved by
questioning what the object is trying to show in relation to one’s self. Through this process,
procedural knowledge and connected knowers learn through acquiring the knowledge of
others.

The ideas of connection and understanding show an important difference in how men and
women view morality. Men tend to separate themselves and become impartial when it comes
to giving justice. Women often see themselves as connected to other people, are more
empathetic, and create morality based on care for others.

Constructed knowledge: Integrating the voices

In the end, women need the ability to reflect on and accept themselves. Instead of learning to
play the system, women must learn to value their own methods of knowing and their own
constructed knowledge. To do this, the constructed knowledge must turn inward instead of
outward, with the idea that “knowledge is constructed, and the knower is an intimate part of
the known.”

Women must learn to listen to themselves in a world where the dominant voice is male, and
when it stifles their own. By continuing to listen to themselves, voicing what is left unsaid, and
learning to read through the different interactions around them, women may validate and
continue their own self-knowledge.

The connectedness that women value must not be discounted. The notion of “real talk” –the
sharing of ideas through open and honest discussion—should be valued. This is the optimum
setting for the co-creation of knowledge. By valuing themselves and seeing themselves as an
indispensable part of knowledge-creation, women may become empowered, working towards
an improvement in their lives as well as in the lives of others.

Meaning of Differences in Knowing

The first wave of the Western Women’s Movement often equated women’s liberation with
reason; its main aim was to achieve equality with men. This goal was to be realized through the
inclusion of women in all aspects of society, meaning that all the rights afforded to men must
be afforded to women. Observably, true inclusion through equal opportunities. To have equal
rights as men is not the same as having actual equality since the structure of the world is based
on male ways of knowing. The education system is an example of this inequality. It was founded
on the interests of the dominant group, specifically men. Education was modeled after what
they needed to know and how they were socialized to learn. Women’s schools were then
modeled after these systems, ignoring the specific ways that women were taught to experience
the world.

Exclusion of Women in Disciplines?

Knowledge, specifically in the sciences, are said to be gender-neutral. However, many feminists
argue that this is not the case. Male bias is present in different disciplines, from the topics one
chooses to study, the kinds of research questions one develops, to the observable data that is
deemed “relevant”.

Carol Gilligan in her book A Different Voice highlights male bias in psychology. She notes that
different psychologists often highlight women’s failure to fit into existing models of human
growth. All women were thought to have these problems and these delays. Yes, this conception
of human beings showed that something was lacking in the analysis of women. Specifically, men
were often used as the template for studies on human beings. The male as a dominant model
made men and men’s behavior the basis of assessing human development. Because women did
not conform to this behavior or pattern of development, they were thought to be abnormal.
Women were also missing from research studies on human behavior. Hence, it can be assumed
that there is a gap in previous theorists’ knowledge on the human condition.