{"id":55,"date":"2005-08-15T09:13:41","date_gmt":"2005-08-15T13:13:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/2005\/08\/15\/non-sexist-language-the-american-philosophical-association-and-jennifer-mather-saul\/"},"modified":"2006-01-08T21:41:38","modified_gmt":"2006-01-09T01:41:38","slug":"non-sexist-language-the-american-philosophical-association-and-jennifer-mather-saul","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/2005\/08\/15\/non-sexist-language-the-american-philosophical-association-and-jennifer-mather-saul\/","title":{"rendered":"Non-sexist Language:  The American Philosophical Association and Jennifer Mather Saul"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Feminist discussions of gender neutrality in language have achieved some reform in spoken and written English language.  Organizations like the American Philosophical Association (APA) provide guidelines to their members in the use of non-sexist language.  Saul suggests similar strategies for creating gender-neutral language.  This paper will discuss how the \u201c<a href=\"http:\/\/www.apa.udel.edu\/apa\/publications\/texts\/nonsexist.html\">Guidelines for Non-Sexist Use of Language<\/a>\u201d (Warren) call for concrete gender-neutral word choice and will identify where Saul\u2019s discussion of gender-biased language differs in guidelines and in justifications.<\/p>\n<p><!--more--><\/p>\n<p>It is important to first identify that the document \u201cGuidelines for Non-Sexist Use of Language\u201d by Virginia L. Warren and found on the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.apa.udel.edu\/apa\/index.html\">APA website<\/a> (and elsewhere) begins with a foreword from the APA\u2019s Executive Director, Eric Hoffman.   Hoffman explicitly states that publication of the document \u201cdoes not imply formal endorsement\u201d (Warren) of the guidelines.  The association provides the guidelines from the APA Committee on the Status of Women in the Profession with the provision that \u201cmembers may find the suggestions in this report helpful in ensuring sensitivity to all the considerations that may influence philosophical conclusions\u201d (Hoffman, qtd. in Warren).  The guidelines contained in the report are suggestions that the APA has made available to its members in order that their publications are written keeping in mind how word choice influences readers.  It is unclear what further effort would cause the APA to \u2018formally\u2019 commit to terminating the use of sexist language use. This foreword suggests that a member can equally make the choice to use gender-biased or gender-neutral language. It is unsettling that Warren\u2019s work requires this foreword and unfortunate that the APA cannot wholeheartedly endorse non-sexist language.<\/p>\n<p>To look at their writing, it is evident that Saul and Warren have different goals in mind.  Warren is ultimately compiling a practical summary of guidelines for the use of nonsexist language.  Her need is to be convincing yet concise.  She accomplishes this through a discussion of three main categories of sexist language:  \u201cThe Generic Use of \u2018Man\u2019 and \u2018He\u2019\u201d, \u201cAddressing the Professional\u201d, and \u201cSexual Stereotyping:  Distortions and Silence\u201d.  She follows this with a summary of guidelines and a chart with seventeen concrete alternatives where nonsexist language replaces sexist language. Her article is easily accessible and quick to assimilate and understand as well as widely available on the Internet.  <\/p>\n<p>Saul has more space to deliver her argument and she does this in essay format rather than as a summary as Warren does.  Because of this freedom, she can pursue greater depth and breadth in her justifications and explanations as well as explore counter-arguments.    Saul does not provide a \u2018summary at a glance\u2019 but does include two and a half pages of \u201cSolutions\u201d (179-181) although her suggestions are spread throughout the essay.  The reader must compile a writer\u2019s reference chart if one is desired.  <\/p>\n<div style=\"float:left;\"> <script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-content\/ga1.js\"> <\/script> <script type=\"text\/javascript\" src=\"http:\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/show_ads.js\"> <\/script> <\/div>\n<p>That said, Warren begins by illustrating with examples how the gender-neutral use of masculine terms and pronouns (\u2018he\u2019, \u2018his\u2019, \u2018man\u2019) fails because these terms are not gender-neutral.  Warren provides examples where the use of \u2018man\u2019 is obviously gender specific, for example:  \u201cSome men are female\u201d (Moulton, qtd. in Warren).  This statement is peculiar because the word \u2018men\u2019 is not gender neutral.  If it were, there would be nothing more noticeable than in the statement \u201cSome human beings are female\u201d (Moulton, qtd. in Warren). Saul agrees with this and provides further examples including \u201cEarly man breastfed his young\u201d (Saul, 175). Females provide breastmilk to their offspring, not males; \u2018man\u2019 in this example is gender-specific.  Saul says that the use of \u2018man\u2019 as gender-neutral defines males as the norm and females as \u2018other\u2019 (Saul, 177).  Saul however goes into greater detail about why these terms cannot be used as gender-neutral and develops three reasons:  they are confusing, they affect our thought, and they are not really neutral.  <\/p>\n<p>Warren explains how \u201cregardless of the author\u2019s intention the generic \u2018man\u2019 is not interpreted gender neutrally\u201d (Moulton qtd. in Warren).  She refers to research where the use of the word \u2018man\u2019 influenced participants to select more male images from a set than when gender-neutral language was used (Miller and Swift, 1976, qtd. in Warren).  Regardless of whether a speaker intends \u2018man\u2019 to be gender inclusive or not, people are more likely to think \u2018male\u2019 when they hear a masculine term. Saul also refers to a study where participants chose more male images when instructed using words like \u2018man\u2019 and \u2018he\u2019 (Erlich and King, 1998 qtd. in Saul, 174).  Both Warren and Saul explain that females are called to mind less often when male terms are used as neutral than when gender-neutral vocabulary is used.  Saul explains how this influences women\u2019s employment opportunities (Saul, 174).  A woman is more likely to apply for a job that uses gender inclusive language like \u2018he and she\u2019 (Saul, 174).  Warren does not explore the specific impact sexist language has on groups of people beyond affirming that there is an effect.<\/p>\n<p>Warren and Saul both acknowledge the challenge of titles when formally addressing an individual (Saul, 183).  Warren simply says that women should not be referred to by first name, but instead by title whevever possible.  In a particular instance, if a man is referred to by title then a woman should also be referred to by title.  In Example 13, Warren comments that women should not be presumed married (Warren).  Saul pursues this issue with greater depth.  She explores the traditional significance attached to a woman\u2019s marital status when addressing her by title (Saul, 184) and the evolution of the title \u2018Ms\u201d (Saul, 183).  Something important she addresses that Warren does not is the global variation in need and use of titles, specifically \u2018Ms\u2019 (Saul, 183) which is more common in the United States than in the United Kingdom (Saul, 183).  Saul also addresses the lack of privacy associated with a woman needing to reveal her marital status before she can be titled (Saul, 185).  Both Warren and Saul agree that when referring to women by title, they should be addressed using \u2018Ms\u2019 regardless of whether or not their marital status is known (Saul, 185).  The reason Saul gives for this is ultimately one of convenience (Saul, 185).  It is sometimes difficult to ascertain an individual\u2019s marital status.  Calling all women \u2018Ms\u2019 eliminates this difficulty.  Warren argues that to a philosopher, language reform should be based on conscious attention to the influence of word choice, avoiding a \u201cvalue-laden perspective\u201d, and the pursuit of truth (Warren).  Convenience does not enter into her arguments.<\/p>\n<p> The term \u2018Ms\u2019 is not without problems however.  Saul\u2019s deeper analysis points out that to call one\u2019s self \u2018Ms\u2019 is often to make a political statement and to label one\u2019s self a \u201cdifficult feminist\u201d (Saul, 194).  Warren discusses different issues regarding addressing people which Saul does not, specifically being conscious of using a married woman\u2019s name in her title rather than her husband\u2019s name, and how to address people of unknown gender, for example \u201cusing \u2018Dear Colleague\u2019 or \u2018Editor\u2019 or \u2018Professor\u2019, etc.\u201d (Warren).  In a footnote, Saul proposes the elimination of titles (183). Warren suggests adopting \u201ca modified memo style\u201d when gender is unknown.  <\/p>\n<p>According to Warren, the third person plural pronoun \u2018they\u2019 tends to have a gender-specific (male) interpretation (Hyde, qtd. in Warren).  Warren\u2019s summary does not include a suggestion for the use of \u2018they\u2019 although in her examples she does use \u2018they\u2019 as a preferred alternative in Example 1.  Saul disagrees and sees \u2018they\u2019 as an acceptable gender-neutral term.  She recalls the historical use of \u2018they\u2019 as a singular pronoun (186).  In Example 6, Warren provides a comment that \u2018they\u2019 is not to be used as a singular in formal writing (The National Council of Teachers of English, 1975, qtd. in Warren).  Saul elaborates on the difficulty between maintaining agreement in number versus agreement in gender, and the especial difficulty faced when gender is unknown (Saul, 181).  The example \u201cPat will pick up their shoes\u201d (Saul, 181) illustrates this particularly effectively because Pat is a gender ambiguous name and Pat is a singular person.  Neither Warren nor Saul can make a grammatically correct suggestion on how to structure this sentence.  <\/p>\n<p>Both Saul and Warren stress the importance of \u201cnot calling attention to irrelevancies\u201d (Warren).  This recalls Frye who also spoke against making gender relevant when it is not (Frye, 18-19).  Sexual stereotyping centralizes gender, for example in terms like \u2018male nurse\u2019 or \u2018female doctor\u2019.  Saul brings to attention terms like \u2018manageress\u2019 and argues that the marking of this word implies that a woman in somehow unsuited to be a \u2018manager\u2019 (Saul, 181).  It also informs about the manager\u2019s gender when gender is irrelevant.  <\/p>\n<p>Sexual stereotypes, according to Warren, perpetuate a male outlook and silence women.  It is important to use examples that feature women and men, not just a generic male or \u2018humanity\u2019 (Warren).  Saul reinforces and expands this with examples of how language encodes male experience and reflects a male viewpoint (Saul, 189).  Saul\u2019s uses the sexual example of penetration versus enclosure (Saul, 189) to show how this experience encodes a male perspective.  <\/p>\n<p>Both Warren and Saul point out how women\u2019s experiences are neglected when male terms are used.  In justifying her position on gender-neutral language, Warren states that the use of the generic male causes invisibility for groups other than women like children and minorities.  Saul neglects this point and focuses only on the dichotomy of male versus female.  Both authors point out that the generic male means neither all people nor all men, but only a particular group of privileged men, as Saul puts it, \u201ca very limited meaning of \u2018men\u2019 \u2013 limited not just to males, but to white, property-owning males\u201d (173).<\/p>\n<p>Because of the different goals of the two authors, it is difficult to suggest a combination of their articles.  Warren must maintain brevity.  Saul\u2019s article would be stronger had it discussed the impact of sexist language on a variety of marginalized groups.  Had Saul also included a summary of guidelines as Warren does, her work would be more accessible as a tool for writers.  Both writers are conscious of the \u201ctendency to confuse verbal purification with real social change\u201d (Ehrenreich, qtd. in Saul, 195) and seem committed to the latter.<\/p>\n<p>References<\/p>\n<p><div class=\"source\">Saul, Jennifer Mather.  <span class=\"sourcetitle\">Feminism:  Issues and Arguments<\/span>.  New York:  Oxford University Press.  2003.<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<p><div class=\"source\">Frye, Marilyn.  <span class=\"sourcetitle\">The Politics of Reality:  Essays in Feminist Theory<\/span>.  California:  The Crossing Press. 1983.<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<p><div class=\"source\">Warren, Viginia L. \u201cGuidelines for Non-Sexist Use of Language.\u201d APAOnline. February 1986.  American Philosophical Association.  March 22.  http:\/\/www.apa.udel.edu\/apa\/publications\/texts\/nonsexist.html.<\/div><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Feminist discussions of gender neutrality in language have achieved some reform in spoken and written English language. Organizations like the American Philosophical Association (APA) provide guidelines to their members in the use of non-sexist language. Saul suggests similar strategies for creating gender-neutral language. This paper will discuss how the \u201cGuidelines for Non-Sexist Use of Language\u201d [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[6,12,10,11,9,2],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=55"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=55"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=55"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.femilicious.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=55"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}