Language and Gender
Is the English language sexist? Yes. I believe sexism is
frequently seen throughout the use of the English language. This theory is
constantly being argued and I have explored the views, thoughts and theories of
many famous linguists. I believe sexism
is very real in the English language, however, I also believe that, even though
the gender inequality demonstrated in our language is still seen in today’s
world, it has relaxed greatly over the past century. It can be argued that this
is primarily due to the factor of women standing up and fighting for equality;
through feminist groups like the suffragettes.
I most certainly do not believe the sexist nature of the
modern English language, is the fault of those living in society today, although
many still tend to be strong believers that this is only right. Throughout the
course of history it has been very clear and understood that males (white in
particular), have always been the leaders or are always the key figures in
famous historical events. To back up this point, there has only ever been one
female prime minister in the UK and that was only of very recently. The point I
am making is that males would have created and governed the use of languages,
so for this reason, I believe the English language is inherently sexist.
Thousands of years ago, when language was first introduced, society was
extremely patriarchal, leaving women with little, to no equality with men.
Hence, when language was introduced, it greatly discriminated women.
Even the ways that men and women speak the English language
outline the stereotypical gender roles and enhance its sexist nature. The
well-known linguist, Sarah Mills, evaluated this in her research of language
and gender in 1995, she commented that “men are socialised into competitive
styles of discourse, whilst women are socialised with a more cooperative style
of speech.” Although very generalised, this belief is widely accepted and can
be easily noticed. In addition, it is a very commonly shared view that there
has always been stereotypical expectations of the appropriate mode of speech
for each gender. This idea, labelled by Deborah Cameron as ‘The Theory of
Verbal Hygiene,’ demonstrates that no matter what, each gender will be expected
to speak in a specific mode. Often, if a member of a certain gender group
drifted away from these expectations, then it is likely for them to be judged
or circled out for speaking in a slightly different manner, or be labelled with
negative connotations. For example, a women who tells or even asks her partner
to do something will be labelled as a ‘nag’ or ‘bossy’, as women are expected
to simply obey and do what they are told. A man whom does not assert his
authority over his partner will be considered a ‘pushover’, as men are expected
to be the one with complete control. This clearly demonstrates a sexist view
upon the use of language.
Moving on, the actual lexical terms within the English
language itself make the idea of sexism in language abundantly more
transparent. As explored by the linguist, Muriel Schultz, there is clear
derogation in our language, as it is frequently found that there are far more
words of negative connotations for describing women over men. I conducted some
research of my own to find out how many lexical terms I could find to describe
a sexually promiscuous female and then male. My results presented that I had
found 57 words to describe women and 8 to describe men. Quite obviously, it can
be seen that there were far greater words to describe women, this is known as ‘Semantic
Over-representation’ - a fairly simple idea that just means there are many more
words to describe a particular concept or group, than their equivalent. In addition
to this theory, it is often noticed that there are numerous words that have the
same meaning for men and women, yet completely opposite connotations, or it is
regularly found that there is no equal to describe the other gender, which can
be referred to as a ‘lexical gap’. For instance, the lexis ‘stud’ is used to
describe a sexually active male and its connotations suggest that this male is
someone to look up to, living the ideal life for any man. However, there are
zero female specific terms that are equal to ‘stud’, the closest being ‘slut’
which has greatly negative connotations.
It can be very reasonably argued that even terms of
endearment are sexist. Geordies use "pet" and "hinny" but
you’re more likely to hear "babe" or “honey” in Essex. Ian Brookes, Consultant Editor at Collins
Language, says, "People use these words as a reflex without thinking of
the item to which the word originally refers." So when someone says
"pet" they are not referring to you as a small animal nor does
"babe" mean you are a child, as the speaker is not looking to cause
offence as they are merely just not thinking of the word’s original meaning. To
make matters worse, I believe terms of endearment are often taken as offence as
they are often expressed in a patronising tone. As most terms of endearments
are aimed towards women or used by older generations, it would seem as though they
are trying to assert power, therefore the recipient may feel intimidated.
As a form of rebellion, recently women have begun to take
back offensive lexical terms to degrade women. This is known as ‘Semantic
Reclamation’ and it is when a word that originally carried negative
connotations has been 'flipped on its head' and is now used in a positive way.
For example, although not used by all, some women have adopted 'bitch' to refer
to their own friends, creating positive connotations.
Moreover, generic Terms and pronouns often provoke sexism.
There is sometimes a generic use of a term or pronoun to describe a group as a
collective, even when there is a variety of people. For example, as a
generation we are referred to as 'mankind' or people refer to a mixed gender
group/audience as he or him. A man named Simon Heffer stated in his research, ‘Strictly
English’, – “I adopt the old rule ‘the masculine will be taken to include
feminine wherever necessary.” Although he is attempting to convey his feelings
are to not discriminate women, he is doing exactly that, no women would be
comfortable responding to male-orientated pronouns. He mentions that it is for
the sake of the English language but he comes across as though trying to
recapture a more patriarchal society.
Finally, although possibly surprising to some, sexism can be
seen in a form of more modern language, while very much adored by the average
teenage girl, even ‘emojis’ are now being considered sexist. As seen in an
advert by ‘Always’, girls are beginning to realise that there are very few
emojis to represent girls, unless, of course, it is demonstrating something
‘girly’. For example, there are girl emojis for dancing, but any emoji
concerning other ‘manly’ sports are portrayed by a male character. Essentially,
even brand new forms of language are still following the same sexist pattern,
demonstrating that each gender can only follow their stereotypical
expectations.
