Hooray for the Decline in Sexist Language

Posted on November 19, 2012 by zoeweil
Image courtesy Antony Pranata via
Creative Commons.

For thirty years I’ve been committed to both using and promoting nonsexist language in writing and speaking. I was criticized for using “he or she” on my papers in law school in 1984, instead of the accepted “he,” meaning “people.” When my son was in fourth grade and I sat in on a day of classes, I was dismayed that the teacher used “man” instead of humanity or humankind to refer to homo sapiens, but when I spoke to her about considering using nonsexist language she looked at me quizzically, truly perplexed by my comment, unable to comprehend my concerns.

In our graduate programs at the Institute for Humane Education the faculty all point out to students when they are using non-inclusive language, explaining that “he” used to refer to all people perpetuates assumptions in our culture and fosters continued sexist thinking, and sometimes sexist behaviors.

Because the English language doesn’t have a word to describe a male or female in the singular (we have “they” to describe both in the plural), we are constantly faced with the challenges of using language that is not discriminatory. As a writer, I often turn statements about a generalized person in the singular into a statement about generalized persons in the plural simply to avoid “he or she,” which I admit is awkward.

This is particularly challenging when trying to avoid speciesist language as well as sexist language by not referring to an animal as “it.” It can’t be done without resorting to “he or she,” and so I often choose to subvert our assumptions and challenge the default “he” by referring to a wild animal whose gender I don’t know as “she,” simply to shake things up and get us all thinking. Recently, walking with a group of teenagers in the woods we came upon a snake. I chose to refer to the snake as “she,” and one of the students asked how I knew the snake was female. I explained that I didn’t and why I used the female pronoun, but I knew that none of the students would have asked how I knew the snake was male if I’d referred to “him or her” as “he.”

And so I was delighted to read this article in The Atlantic about the decline in sexist language. It’s about time.

~ Zoe

Zoe Weil, President, Institute for Humane Education
Author of Most Good, Least Harm, Above All, Be Kind, and The Power and Promise of Humane Education
My TEDxConejo talk: “Solutionaries”
My TEDxDirigo talk: “The World Becomes What You Teach“
My TEDxYouth@BFS “Educating for Freedom”

Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to our RSS feed.

Filed under: language, MOGO (Most Good) | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Fun With Pronouns: Bringing “Aha” to Humane Education

Posted on August 19, 2009 by zoeweil

Once a year at the Institute for Humane Education, our M.Ed. and Humane Education Certificate Program students come for a week to our beautiful facility in coastal Maine for the residency component of their otherwise distance-learning program. During residency week, the students each do a 15 minute presentation on a humane education topic of their choice. Two weeks ago, Chrissy Bevens brought the concept of language, and specifically, the pronouns we choose, to our attention in a way that was both funny and educational.

Chrissy began by exploring sexist language — that is, the use of words, such as the pronoun “he,” to describe the gender of an undetermined human. Then she entertained us with a Mad Libs story that called upon us, her audience, to fill in a variety of words. In the context of her lesson, the most important word was naming an animal, and we chose “anteater.” At the end of the Mad Libs, the story unfolded (humorous as is always the case with Mad Libs), and nothing seemed amiss.

But then Chrissy asked us to change “anteater” to “humane educator,” and suddenly the story read very wrong because the humane educator was referred to as “it” in the beginning of a new sentence. When the story was about an anteater the word “it”didn’t seem wrong to most, even though anteaters are comprised of males and females and certainly are not things, but rather beings.

For years I’ve talked about sexist and speciesist language and have written in the margins of students’ papers when such language has been used — raising the questions that Chrissy raised — but without the “Aha” moment her excellent, fun, and amusing approach elicited.

Learning this way – through “Aha” moments and humor – sticks. I’ll be using Chrissy’s activity in the future.

~ Zoe

Image courtesy of di_the_huntress via Creative Commons.


Like my blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to the RSS feed.

Filed under: humane education, Institute for Humane Education, language, speciesism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off

Changing Systems 4: Male/Female Ratios at Colleges a Call for Educational Quality and Respect for All

Posted on February 23, 2009 by zoeweil

On average, there are more women than men in college now. One statistic puts the ratio at 57/43 female to male with a trend that’s leading toward a 60/40 ratio. At my son’s high school, the highest grade point averages have belonged to girls for several years now. My son doesn’t find this surprising at all. It’s what he expects. He’s not sure why, but he thinks that in general girls work harder. He doesn’t think they’re inherently smarter.

Here’s what I think. I think that school systems (sitting at desks listening to teachers; having separate unconnected-to-each-other classes requiring multitasking and much to organize) generally (not always) work better for girls than boys, and that girls do better in the typical school structure. For years this system that may work better for girls than boys didn ’t offset entrenched sexism, which favored boys. Many studies have shown that boys are called on more frequently than girls and receive more attention, for example. But as institutionalized sexism has diminished, and as girls have gained the opportunities previously available only to boys, girls have been able to surpass boys academically and pursue higher education in greater numbers.

Should we be concerned that there are so many more girls than boys in college? After all, even though it’s great that girls are achieving so much, we still have a ways to go to reach full equality. Women still get paid less than men for the same work, and the ratio of women to men in leadership positions is far from equal. So maybe it’s a good thing that the ratio at colleges is 57/43 women to men. As a feminist this may be good news, but as the mother of a teenage son it’s really not.

I want our schools to equally serve our sons and daughters. I want a society where equal opportunity includes meeting the varying needs and learning styles of all our students, so that each can reach their potential and thrive. I want systems to favor both equality and respect for difference. As an educator, I know this can be done, but it requires a willingness to creatively confront and change outdated systems.

I believe that we should consider the skewed ratio of women to men in college a wake up call to assess and change our educational system so that it serves all our children better. And of course, we still need to confront the tightly coiled tentacles of sexism and unravel them so that our now majority women college graduates truly have the same opportunities as their male classmates.

~ Zoe

Filed under: education, systemic change | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 442 other followers