Tag Archives: language

In Defense of Gender Inclusive Language

I used to not care about gender exclusive language at all. I would get a little annoyed when people pushed for gender inclusive language – switching pronouns was confusing, “he/she” was unattractive, “he or she” was cumbersome to the eye, etc. I said that I wanted an equal paycheck before I would ever care about pronouns.

Then, I was at a college art show reading an artist’s statement describing how the artist intended the viewer to experience his painting. He used only female pronouns. I read it and felt, for the first time in my life, included into the default. Included into the hypothetical viewer. When I read hypothetical male-only pronouns, I understand intellectually that the writing is referring to any hypothetical person. But when I read the artist’s statement with female pronouns, for the first time I felt like it could be talking about me.

One of my friends and I had a long discussion about this topic. He had just used the word “man” to refer to all people, and I asked him to use gender inclusive language if he was in fact including both genders in his statement – to which he responded that he never really paid attention to such admonishments of gender exclusivity (exclusiveness?) because even though he was saying the word “man”, he meant “all people”. We had a long discussion, and part of what I told him about was my own experience with how much gender exclusive language affects the experience and thought of the reader, regardless of the intent behind the exclusive words. I also mentioned that in academia, gender exclusive language is not longer considered acceptable in published works at all. Because of that point, he stated that he would try to change his language because I had made a good case about how it can offend women and make them feel excluded from things that are supposedly referring to all people.

And I told him that that wasn’t enough for me. Yes, I think it’s fine to change one’s language to gender inclusive because one earnestly wants to avoid offending people, but I didn’t call him out just because his language offended me; I called him out because he was speaking inaccurately. I think that most people will eventually change their language because gender exclusivity will continue to be considered more and more offensive, and therefore less acceptable in more and more social circles. But if that was the only reason that anyone ever changed the way they spoke, then nothing would have ever changed in the first place.

During the conversation, one of my other friends pointed out to me that women’s rights (from a USA point of view) have come a huge way in just the 90 years since the suffrage movement. Sure. I am grateful for the rights I have, especially the rights that I wouldn’t have had just a century ago. But I’m not calling you out on gender-exclusive language because I’m upset about society being unfair – I’m calling you out because you’re being inaccurate.

I’m not insisting that all of society change right now – I’m insisting that individuals that I speak to speak accurately, and refrain from saying that they “mean” men and women when they only say the word for men. Because you can’t get past that. No matter what you say the words “man” or “he” etc. mean when you say them, you cannot get past the fact that the words themselves are referring to males only. Speaking with gender inclusive language isn’t something you owe to women or hippies or those annoying there-are-no-differences-between-men-and-women-at-all people; it’s something you will want to do if you have any desire to communicate accurately.

“Rape”

Three days ago a very close friend of mine and I were watching the StarCraft II podcast The State of the Game, an episode of which was specifically discussing foul language and the professional gaming scene.1 I turned to him and casually asked him what his stance on the subject was, a question which began a debate that lasted the better part of an hour.

This post is very difficult for me to write. I face the challenge of having to fairly represent our respective opinions, and I worry I will portray our separate viewpoints with a bias of some sort. In spite of this, I will try to press on and do my best.


Our discussion was, as you may have guessed from the title of this post, on the usage of the word “rape,” specifically in the context of the gaming community. To those perhaps unfamiliar with the terminology, the second entry on Urban Dictionary reads: “To utterly defeat another person in any form of competitive activies [sic].”2  An example of it being used would be someone saying to his friends, in the aftermath of a victorious Halo match, “We just raped those guys.”

My standpoint being that the word shouldn’t be used in this manner, my first point was one that INcontroL3 (Geoff Robinson) made, that its usage is harmful to e-sports in that it lowers the community in the eyes of others. My friend’s response [hereafter referred to as T] was that the context needs to be taken into account; if the word is being used in a setting where everyone fully understands the meaning behind the word [i.e. a StarCraft II stream] then there shouldn’t be any problem.

Outside of that specific context, T pointed out that language is an ever-changing thing, a sentiment I couldn’t, and can’t, disagree with. We give words both meaning and connotation, therefore it is fully within our power to change the words if we’d like. He went so far as to say that the word “rape” has already changed, fully appropriated by the gaming community. My argument was that although this may be the case, this change certainly didn’t need to occur. I wanted to address this trend in popular culture, the inclination to forever push our boundaries [moral and otherwise], but that would have been off topic and is for another time.

Similar to that point, however, I stressed that the word was chosen for a reason. A counterpoint to what he said about “rape” losing its meaning, I brought up the fact that it has such strength about it. It’s a loaded word, and was chosen for its level of offensiveness. Just because you’re no longer stating that you are going to sexually attack another person doesn’t erase the original sentiment behind the word choice.

Lastly, and what many of you may have been thinking while reading this, is that the word “rape” has such potential to offend. Those who have been or personally know rape victims may be very hurt by hearing the word thrown around so casually. A point against hypersensitivity was then made by T: we use much more violent terms such as “kill” and “murder” in regards to video games, so why is there never any outcry made concerning those who have had friends or family murdered?

Furthermore, there is a case to be made for discernment. T placed a lot of emphasis on the ability of the average person to know what the context behind the word is. If someone involved in a contest of any kind [be it video games or basketball] uses the word “rape” and directs it at their opponent then it is immediately assumed that they don’t mean the actual definition of the word. When I once again brought up those who were offended we were brought full circle to his point about the evolution of language.

T reminded me that language is in a state of continual development, and at the very least we are in a transitional period. I argued back that if this transition is going to offend and hurt others, then it would be better if it didn’t happen.  There is also the matter of those same people being hurt and offended even after the transition has fully taken place.

After all was said and done we agreed on a few points, yet it was apparent that on others we would remain divided. According to the Online Etymology Dictionary4, the Latin word “rapere” simply mean to “seize, carry off by force, abduct”;  it wasn’t until the 15th century that the more sexual aspects of the word began to be used. It may be that a few years down the line the word “rape” is thrown around as casually as “beat.” My stance, however, was never that words can change their meaning, but that sometimes they shouldn’t have to.


1. Source: http://blip.tv/sotg/starcraft-2-state-of-the-game-ep41-5229247 [starts again {was discussed earlier} at around 1:50:50]

2. Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=rape

3. If you really want to know who this guy is: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/INcontroL

4. Source: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=rape&searchmode=none