One of the first things the House passed this year was a resolution that required its members to refrain from gendered familial terms such as “mother,” “father,” “aunt,” “brother,” etc. Now companies such as Cigna are banning their employees from using gendered terms like “wife,” “husband,” and “sister,” to name a few. Instead, people are required to refer to their husbands and wives as “partners” or “spouses” and to brothers or sisters as “siblings.” And now we are told that we should no longer celebrate “Mother’s Day” but rather “Birthing Person’s Day.”
So why does this matter? Isn’t this just substituting language that still conveys almost the same thing as gendered terms but in a way that’s more inclusive? And shouldn’t we be more inclusive? Well, it depends on what you mean by inclusive and what mandated inclusivity will cost us.
First, including more lifestyles, perspectives, and people should not eliminate those that are already accepted and mainstreamed. Doing so is actually exclusive in the same ways in which those who call for more inclusivity rage against. At this point most of us think that even if we would not engage in particular lifestyles or embody specific identities those who do should be respected and treated with dignity, not forced to conform. (There are, of course, exceptions to this, like pedophiles.) Why wouldn’t we extend this same respect and dignity to those who want to call their spouse their husband or wife because that distinction is meaningful to them and an expression of their identity?
There is also a problem in collapsing categories when making gendered distinctions is actually useful and meaningful. For instance, people don’t relate to the broad, “ungendered” group of people called siblings. Brothers relate to brothers in ways that challenge, haze, and rough-house each other while sisters tend to either be in more subtle competition with each other or have close emotional bonds. And those who grow up with a sibling of the other gender usually have an easier time relating to the other gender in professional and personal relationships later in life.
What is more, having gender distinctions in language does not mean that all men and women have to fit certain stereotypes. In fact, we should expect exceptions to gender generalizations in groups as well as people. That being said, exceptions to the rule do not disprove the rule in every case. To say it does is a generalization, ironically enough. And our ability to generalize is highly necessary since we cannot always have all the relevant information when we need to make snap decisions.
For example, if I saw a man screaming and waving a gun in the air while running around my neighborhood, I would infer that that man poses a threat because that behavior is generally threatening. Based on that generalization, I would respond accordingly. Now it’s possible that there could be another explanation for this man’s behavior, like he is filming a scene for an independent film, or he’s holding a toy gun and playing with his kids. Even if one of these alternative explanations were true, I would certainly be justified in responding to that man as if he were a threat.
Secondly, removing gendered language also removes gendered terms of respect that facilitate civil interactions. If we can’t use terms like “mother,” “uncle,” and “sister,” it seems like “Mr.,” “Miss,” “sir,” “ma’am,” and comparable terms must also be on the chopping block. We used to call people “Mr.,” “Miss,” “sir,” and “ma’am,” etc., as a way to show courtesy and respect. Now I’m convinced that since a radical, slim minority would find these to be “oppressive” and “offensive,” these terms will be the next to go. And why should we care? We should care because we need to maintain terms that make our interactions more respectful and civil in an age in which we are so divided and at odds with each other.
The de-gendering of language has more serious consequences than all of this. The elimination of words becomes the elimination of thought itself. Words matter because they hold meaning, represent ideas, and are a critical way for us to think and communicate. Even though some words are interchangeable, each word is unique in its precise usage and connotations. That is why we will say something and then say, “No, that’s not actually what I meant to say,” and search for a better word. Or we’ll have that experience where the right word is on the tip of our tongue and its synonyms won’t suffice.
Using words that have specific, agreed upon meaning is necessary for us to clarify what we are thinking and to formulate those thoughts so we can share them with others. These very facts are evident in what we are doing together right now. I have used words with specific meanings to think through and then write out these ideas, and because we share roughly the same understanding of those words I am willing to venture that you understand what I am writing.
Using gender-neutral terms limits the ways in which we can think of ourselves and our relationships. I don’t think of myself as just a spouse but as a wife. I am a daughter, sister, and woman, not just someone’s offspring, a sibling, or a person. While my gender is not the most important thing about me, it is a critical part of the way I relate to others. To deny that is not only to deny my identity but also reality.
So, are there terms that should be banned? While I do not support the state banning any words or terms outright (although the state has an obligation to take explicit threats and clear incitements to violence seriously), I do think that there are certain words that we should avoid using in certain contexts. When someone is clearly using words as slurs to inflict damage that should be rebuked. The “N word” is the clearest example. That being said, that particular word comes up in quite a bit of rap music, and in that context it is not meant to inflict damage, but rather to reclaim a historic slur (or so I have been told).
Just think about this. If these people can get away with eliminating these gendered terms that have been part of almost every civilization for millennia, terms that we use in everything from legal documents to Hallmark cards, what else will they do? Claim that the family itself should be abolished? Eliminate any mention of God or the divine? I’m willing to bet that this is just the start.
One last point- what is the gender-neutral term for aunt and uncle? Aucle? This is where this insanity has brought us -inventing words for an invented problem.