In February 2014, the former catering worker Valeria Jones sued her employer, the Bon Appetit Management Co. in Oregon, United States, after co-workers numerous times referred to her as "female". Jones felt offended by this term since she identified as "gender-neutral" (Andersen 2014). US$ 518,682 were adjudged to Jones as compensation money for "pronoun pain and humiliation" (Owens 2014).
This lawsuit , in which a particular usage of language was punished, demonstrates how quickly the idea of a genderised language can be exaggerated and thus discredited. However, it does not mean that a language which is sensitive towards sex and gender should be abandoned for its realisation might so easily be distorted. An enlightened society is indeed in need of a language that is gender-inclusive. Yet, taking into account the case of Valeria Jones, the inevitable question must arise whether and when such a language should be enforced by law and policy. In the following paragraphs, it is to be shown that a gender-inclusive language has to be enforced (only), when its non-application causes legal consequences by excluding people from rights. In all other cases, common sense is likely to be more thoughtful an adviser.
Therefore, this paper is dedicated to the practical aspects of a gender-inclusive language and its realistic implementation. Hopefully, it will have a share in reconciling the still ongoing differences between proponents and opponents of a genderised language.
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- What is Gender-Inclusive Language?
- Why is Gender-Inclusive Language Important?
- The Controversy Surrounding Gender-Inclusive Language
- Gender-Inclusive Language and Human Rights
- Enforcement of Gender-Inclusive Language
Objectives and Key Themes
This paper aims to explore the practical aspects of gender-inclusive language and its implementation, seeking to reconcile differing viewpoints on its necessity and enforcement. It examines the potential for both misunderstanding and discrimination arising from gendered language and considers the ethical implications of legal enforcement.
- Defining gender-inclusive language and distinguishing it from related concepts.
- Analyzing the potential for both misleading and discriminatory assumptions in language use.
- Examining the controversies and exaggerations surrounding the debate on gender-inclusive language.
- Exploring the relationship between gender-inclusive language and the guarantee of equal human rights.
- Determining the appropriate scope and limits of enforcing gender-inclusive language.
Chapter Summaries
Introduction: This introductory section sets the stage by discussing the Valeria Jones case, highlighting the potential for misinterpretations and the need for a nuanced approach to gender-inclusive language. It emphasizes the paper's focus on practical implementation and reconciliation of differing viewpoints.
What is Gender-Inclusive Language?: This chapter defines gender-inclusive language as a way of writing and speaking that minimizes assumptions about the biological sex or gender of those referenced. It differentiates this concept from similar terms like "gender-neutral" and "gender-sensitive," explaining why "gender-inclusive language" is preferred. The chapter emphasizes the importance of avoiding value judgments and negative framing that could hinder acceptance.
Why is Gender-Inclusive Language Important?: This chapter explores the reasons why assumptions about sex and gender in language are problematic. It argues that such assumptions can be misleading, leading to misunderstandings and offense, but more importantly, that they can be discriminatory, violating the principle of equal opportunity. The chapter connects gender-inclusive language directly to the fair application of laws and rights for all.
The Controversy Surrounding Gender-Inclusive Language: This chapter delves into the reasons behind the ongoing debate surrounding gender-inclusive language. It argues that both proponents and opponents often exaggerate their positions, leading to unproductive conflict. Proponents may overreach by violating freedom of expression or biological realities, while opponents may dismiss any attempts at inclusivity as inherently "sexist." The chapter highlights the defensive reactions that often accompany discussions on this topic.
Gender-Inclusive Language and Human Rights: This chapter addresses the apparent dilemma between the goal of gender-inclusive language (guaranteeing equal human rights) and the right to freedom of expression. It argues that freedom of expression is only possible within a society that already guarantees universal human rights, including the principle of equality. Therefore, gender-inclusive language is not a violation of free speech but a necessary component of ensuring equal rights for all.
Enforcement of Gender-Inclusive Language: This chapter discusses the question of enforcing gender-inclusive language in all aspects of life. It argues that while the state has a responsibility to ensure laws adhere to human rights principles and that citizens respect them, it should not interfere with private speech unless laws are violated. Enforcement should therefore be focused on legal and official contexts where equal access to rights is at stake.
Keywords
Gender-inclusive language, gender-neutral language, gender-sensitive language, equal opportunity, human rights, freedom of expression, discrimination, legal enforcement, societal inclusion, language policy.
Frequently Asked Questions: A Comprehensive Guide to Gender-Inclusive Language
What is the overall focus of this document?
This document provides a comprehensive overview of gender-inclusive language, exploring its practical aspects, implementation challenges, and ethical considerations. It aims to bridge the gap between differing viewpoints on its necessity and enforcement, analyzing potential misunderstandings and discriminatory implications of gendered language.
What are the key themes explored in the document?
The key themes include defining gender-inclusive language and differentiating it from related concepts; analyzing the potential for misleading and discriminatory assumptions in language; examining controversies and exaggerations surrounding the debate; exploring the relationship between gender-inclusive language and human rights; and determining the appropriate scope and limits of enforcing gender-inclusive language.
What is gender-inclusive language, and how does it differ from gender-neutral or gender-sensitive language?
Gender-inclusive language minimizes assumptions about the biological sex or gender of those referenced. While similar to "gender-neutral" and "gender-sensitive," the document argues that "gender-inclusive language" is the preferred term because it better emphasizes the avoidance of value judgments and negative framing that might hinder acceptance.
Why is gender-inclusive language important?
Gender-inclusive language is crucial because assumptions about sex and gender in language can be misleading and offensive. More importantly, these assumptions can be discriminatory, violating the principle of equal opportunity and hindering the fair application of laws and rights for all.
What are the main controversies surrounding gender-inclusive language?
The debate often involves exaggerations from both proponents and opponents. Proponents may overreach, potentially violating freedom of expression or biological realities. Opponents may dismiss inclusivity attempts as inherently "sexist." The document highlights the defensive reactions frequently associated with discussions on this topic.
How does gender-inclusive language relate to human rights?
The document argues that gender-inclusive language is not a violation of free speech but a necessary component of ensuring equal rights for all. Freedom of expression is only possible within a society that guarantees universal human rights, including equality. Therefore, inclusive language supports, rather than contradicts, fundamental human rights.
What is the appropriate approach to enforcing gender-inclusive language?
The document suggests that while the state has a responsibility to ensure laws adhere to human rights and citizens respect them, it shouldn't interfere with private speech unless laws are violated. Enforcement should focus on legal and official contexts where equal access to rights is at stake.
What are some key words associated with the topics discussed?
Key words include: Gender-inclusive language, gender-neutral language, gender-sensitive language, equal opportunity, human rights, freedom of expression, discrimination, legal enforcement, societal inclusion, and language policy.
What case study is mentioned in the introduction?
The introduction mentions the Valeria Jones case to illustrate the potential for misinterpretations and the need for a nuanced approach to gender-inclusive language.
What is the overall conclusion of the document regarding the implementation of gender-inclusive language?
The document advocates for a practical and balanced approach to implementing gender-inclusive language, emphasizing the importance of reconciliation between different viewpoints and a focus on legal and official contexts where equal access to rights is paramount, while respecting freedom of expression in private contexts.
- Quote paper
- Dominik Jesse (Author), 2015, The strange case of Valeria Jones. Argument over a thoughtful enforcement of a gender-inclusive language, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/294749
