Gender bias in language?

[Emmz]

It is undeniably there; from the generic use of "man" & "he" (the famous supposedly inclusive, third person-singular pronoun), the amount of pejorative terms for women in contrast to men, to "Chairman" & "Midwife", where both jobs have a distinctive stereotype attached in regards to the gender of both... Of course these are just a few examples but even if you disagree with them, shouldn't gender bias, through our once (though arguably current) patriarchal society, have naturally developed even if my examples aren't so, well, exemplary of that?

Anyway, the existence of gender bias in language is not, I feel, in question: and to be honest, I believe its existence in language doesn't really affect my understanding that men are equal with women: however, this is a point of contention with some, so I now turn to you: is this bias in language reversible? Should it be changed through the law; if we were to follow that route, wouldn't that imply that language somehow shapes the way we think and consequently act towards other human beings, rather than the opposite where our thoughts shape our language: which would mean that gender bias (as we ever move onwards to true equality) would surely remove itself and thus said law be pointless?

Looking back, my post seems somewhat jumbled so I'll try and clarify: does language have the power to over-rule our own thoughts, influence and affect them; and if so, should we somehow try to control language through the Law, in the name of equal rights?

[Epistemologist]

Yes, there's gender bias in all languages to some extent, but it's usually often a reflection of the culture itself. I don't think it's bad in most cases.

Some of it is meaningless though e.g. in Spanish, nouns are either masculine or feminine. Yet, sometimes the "default" man e.g. man, "favor" a certain sex.

Language, however, doesn't have the power to overrule our thoughts. I think that it's the other way around: our thoughts overrule language. Or at least the thoughts of the culture that possesses the language rule the language per se.

Language, by the way, is also considered by many epistemologists to be a way of knowing. We pass ideas to each other within our communities; yes, they may be biased, but let's just say it's the words aren't any more biased than the people who use them.

I don't think anything ought to be done to change them if you're talking about outlawing some words to minimize bias.

Within some feminist extremist circles, however, the word "womyn" or some variation of that is used. They don't represent the dominant culture employing the English language, though, so sweeping change on that matter seems unlikely in that context.

[Kamehameha34]

Don't look at "man" or "he" as a word. Look at them as a suffix, meaning people.

"Man" is also included in "woman", and "he" is in "she".

I don't think "him" is an issue, because there really aren't any regularly used terms, such as "chairmen" with "him" in them.

Just look at the term "them", it also has "he" in it, even when it could be referring to a group of women.

[Jack]

The English language is too fluid, too dynamic, to even consider legislating its usage. Social standards and pressure usually police our language. As much as we consider the term nigger inappropriate and hateful, it's not illegal. Society has determined it should no longer be used among intelligent adults (rappers, obviously, are exempt from "common decency").

We don't need the law to tell us how to employ our language, nor do we want the government trying to dictate English usage. Peer pressure and society will continue to influence what we say and how we say it.

[Epistemologist]

Quote by: Isherwood We don't need the law to tell us how to employ our language, nor do we want the government trying to dictate English usage. Peer pressure and society will continue to influence what we say and how we say it.

Yes, government is not the only available tool to achieve cultural solidarity.

[Nono]

You can't legislate language. Hell, even the Nazis failed at that.

However, it isn't true to say that language in no way rules our thoughts. It is the product of our thoughts but also the medium by which we express them, and therefore a factor ultimately influencing our thoughts. You can't go swimming without getting wet-

Language is invariably full of bias, just like the people who created and maintain it. An unsubtle example is the term "bachelor". The direct female equivalent is "spinster". But the two words have rather different flavours, don't they?

[brien]

should we somehow try to control language through the Law,

I yi yi.....now come pople who want to control language by law. What is next, how someone thinks? Break out the electrodes Borman and Mengele......Jeeeeez will it ever end?

[kubedawg]

Quote by: Isherwood The English language is too fluid, too dynamic, to even consider legislating its usage. Social standards and pressure usually police our language. As much as we consider the term nigger inappropriate and hateful, it's not illegal. Society has determined it should no longer be used among intelligent adults (rappers, obviously, are exempt from "common decency"). We don't need the law to tell us how to employ our language, nor do we want the government trying to dictate English usage. Peer pressure and society will continue to influence what we say and how we say it.

I agree because perception is a person by person basis. You can't control a language that constnatly changes/has different meanings.

But what about the phrase, "Ladies and gentlemen?"

If addressing both male and female parties, they become equal IMO, unless directly saying men and slaves or something like that. But you can also tell a lot of times if someone is being biased torwards another sex/race.

[pahl]

Yes, Helium is biased, it should be exchanged with Shelium.

Seriosly, the language is "male dominated" because of history, but i dont think its a problem.

Some people take it to seriosly though, like this one female professor that was gonna have a lecture about algorithms or something like that. She wound up spending almost 30 minutes talking about this very subject instead of what she was supposed to be talking about (guess since her line of work was so male-dominated). Not that i cared much

[Gods_Mercenary]

I'm pretty sure the controling of ideas through the controling of language was an idea that Big brother in George Orwell's 1984 thought was pretty good, not exactly a good source for legislative ideas.

P.S. If you've never read 1984, go out, buy it, and read it. It should be required reading in every highschool in america, and everywhere else too.

[Occam]

Language and thought are reciprocal. We modify our language as our thoughts and concepts change. And, our language shapes the thought processes of our children.

There were a great many pejorative words against various ethnic groups in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and the Irish, Italians, Jews, and other groups that were immigrating to the U.S. During that time prejudice against these groups was rampant. As the society changed, those words were phased out and children didn't learn to be prejudiced against those people.

Two groups that have also suffered severe discrimination have been blacks and gays. Now, the put-down words are disappearing and so is the prejudice among younger people. Older people still have their negative views, but as they die off, so do their opinions.

The bias against women is much more deeply ingrained in our language so it's more difficult to phase out those words, but it's happening - slowly.

I've seen a couple of English papers suggesting the adoption of a set of gender free pronouns to be used in place of he, his, and him when the sex of the person is unknown or unimportant.

I predict that in the next few years some of the more popular female authors will write their books with these words replacing the generic male ones. Gradually, these will be adopted, and the generic he, his, him will be phased out. Similarly, other word are or will disappear. Like Stewardess becoming Flight Attendant.

So, we should completely get rid of gender bias in, say, two hundred years.

Occam

[grandpa]

I think most people commonly use "he" as a type of shorthand instead of saying "he/she." It is kind of annoying and language hasn't really accomodated this situation very well. I sometimes would take one of my buddy's cues and refer to a person as an "it," though this only tends to confuse people.

Grandpa h.

[Kamehameha34]

I say we make a new, non-gender specific, singular pronoun.

I vote for squish.

[zippster18]

The same sort of thing goes for the French language. Une = feminine Un=masculine. I was always interested which material objects they put as Une and Un. like cars for example...Female

[kubedawg]

I vote to end this whole debate, and slap these people across the forehead who take these words that aren't offensive at all except in their eyes, and turn them into some candy coated childinsh word that they are capable of stomaching, words that won't hurt their dainty little ears...

Words like stewardess changing to flight attendant... Like it really matters...

It only matters when the context of the word is used in the derogetory sense...

‘There is a condition in battle, most people know about it, it’s when your nervous has been stressed to its absolute peak and you can’t take anymore. In World War I, that condition was known as “shellshock.” A nice, direct word…two syllables. In World War II, that very same condition was known as “battle fatigue.” Four syllables, takes a little longer to say, doesn’t seem to hurt as much. Then we had the war in Korea and the same exact condition was called “operational exhaustion.” Hey, we’re up to eight syllables now, and the humanity has been completely drained out of the condition, rendering it sterile. Finally, we came to the war in Vietnam and thanks to the lies and deceit surrounding that war, it’s not surprising that the very same condition was called “post-traumatic stress disorder.” Still eight syllables, but we’ve added a hyphen. I’ll bet you if we had still been calling it “shellshock,” some of those Vietnam veterans would have gotten the help they needed at the time.’
- George Carlin

People need to stop focusing on going around their problems and face them head on. If you have a problem with what someone said to you, SAY something back. Tell them what's on your mind, don't try to manipulate everyone else into using your 'rated G' words, because where there is a, "making love," you can be rest assured, that somewhere nearby, someone is saying the word FUCK.

[Chancellor]

Quote by: grandpa I think most people commonly use "he" as a type of shorthand instead of saying "he/she." It is kind of annoying and language hasn't really accomodated this situation very well. I sometimes would take one of my buddy's cues and refer to a person as an "it," though this only tends to confuse people. Grandpa h.

The third person singlular male pronouns (he, his) is also used as the generic third person singular male pronoun and there's nothing wrong with that - except in the minds of feminists and sissies who fight to do away with anything overtly male in society. Of course, if a person is going to be insistent on avoiding the use of the third person singular male pronouns, the word "one" sometimes serves as a suitable alternative.

[Epistemologist]

Quote by: Chancellor The third person singlular male pronouns (he, his) is also used as the generic third person singular male pronoun and there's nothing wrong with that - except in the minds of feminists and sissies who fight to do away with anything overtly male in society. Of course, if a person is going to be insistent on avoiding the use of the third person singular male pronouns, the word "one" sometimes serves as a suitable alternative.

Yes, I often dislike having to write he/she all the time. But now, it's grammatical convention, so if you don't write "he or she," you'd lose points on an essay or paper. :(

[Gods_Mercenary]

That's rediculous, feminists wonder why no one takes them seriously.

[Epistemologist]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary That's rediculous [sic], feminists wonder why no one takes them seriously.

Yeah, there are even some feminists who demand that people use the word "womyn" instead of "woman" because of the latter's association with the word "man." That's pretty messed up.

[Nono]

You can always find easily-shot-down strawman examples from somebody. Who cares?

Quote by: Occam I predict that in the next few years some of the more popular female authors will write their books with these words replacing the generic male ones. Gradually, these will be adopted, and the generic he, his, him will be phased out. Similarly, other word are or will disappear. Like Stewardess becoming Flight Attendant. So, we should completely get rid of gender bias in, say, two hundred years.

I disagree with your prediction. Any such change requires popular will. It ain't there.

Quote by: zippster The same sort of thing goes for the French language. Une = feminine Un=masculine. I was always interested which material objects they put as Une and Un. like cars for example...Female

The word for car is probably feminine because it's a carry-over from la machine. In German the most frequent word for car is masculine. So what? Anyway, it would probably never occur to a native speaker to think of these things as "male" or "female". It's just a grammatical device. Any more than you think of arithmetic when somebody uses the word "to" (since it sounds just like "two").

Quote by: Chancellor The third person singlular male pronouns (he, his) is also used as the generic third person singular male pronoun and there's nothing wrong with that.

Right. It's generic.

Of course, if a person is going to be insistent on avoiding the use of the third person singular male pronouns, the word "one" sometimes serves as a suitable alternative.

I disagree. Too abstract and heavy.