Thursday, March 15, 2007

On: On: Why Sexist Language Matters

Upon re-reading my last post, I am somewhat disturbed by its air of snarkiness . Falling in love with the virtual sound of my own voice leaves room in my heart for little else.
Just to clarify, that even though I am hurtling towards Total Enlightenment, I am sexist. More correctly, I have sexist beliefs and reactions. Still. I live in a society where gender stereotypes are subtly and not-so subtly encouraged (enforced?) , each sex learning and internalizing what attitudes and behaviours are appropriate. So, I grew up with certain expectations of females , and females were raised to meet those expectations; and vice versa, of course. Couple this with the human propensity for categorization, well...
My real problem with the alternet article is my utter disdain for the human tendancy to focus on symptoms rather than root problems. Will replacing "mankind" with "humankind" make a dent in domestic violence or encourage more young women to enter the hard sciences? Is "sexist" language even a real problem, or merely a linguistic artifact? My ultimate problem with the article is this: I believe that in an ideal (read: equal) world, it wouldn't matter to a woman whether or not she was called "Chairman" or "Chairperson."

And just to tiptoe furthur into controversy (and closer to snarkiness), I believe that women have just as much power as men (and yes, as a broad category, men and women in society are different). They, on the whole, don't have the same type of power, but it is sexist to insist that they are somehow weaker for it. Female power is neglected because male power is more public; and since both men and women seem to covet it more, more esteemed. But isn't esteem, and even the "power" which women are struggling for, simply a masculine value which may be over-emphasized in our society? I honestly believe that any individual woman is capable of exercising what is traditionally "male" power. But statisically, at this particular moment in history, most are not doing so. I hope that as women aspire to traditionally male-dominated roles, a parallel movement to recognize the more subtle powers of women is underway as well. At the very least, I hope that all of us, on an individual level, accept and honour the power of the feminine. And if this influences changes in language, more power to us. But don't put the cart before the horse.

1 comment:

captainorange said...

Dear, dear. And here I thought you were a true believer in the power of human language. You know, the connection between what we think... then say... then do.

Don't get me wrong, I'm aware that enforcing a change to the way I speak based on 'PC' grounds will not change how I as an individual feel, and it will only result in a new word or phrase springing up to replace the old. However, I think that it is a useful way of pointing out that there is a problem that needs to be addressed.

We won't come to the 'root' of the problem, as you say, by ignoring the leaves or trunk of the plant.