|
Law in Contemporary Society
|
|
The Linguistic Push for Gender Inclusion-- By AndyZheng - 23 Feb 2024ProblemLia Thomas decided to quit swimming because of the pressure she faced from the public. A significant part of her decision is in response to public sentiment that she should not participate in female athletics. To express this sentiment, countless hateful messages ridicule her gender, using he/him/his pronouns to describe her and justify her win in a NCAA competition as a result of her trans status. The question at the core of the backlash against her is whether society rejects trans women as a category or tarns women competing in women’s sports. However, this is not the question I wish to address. I am interested in how linguistic and social changes interact if we envision a world where people like Lia Thomas would feel safe participating in professional sports that most identify with their gender identity.Struggle between Linguistic Change and Social ChangeOn one hand, it seems natural that linguistic changes are merely a reflection of social changes. One example is in the decreased usage of the N-word by people who are not Black. The shift in this linguistic change follows a complex history with Black folks that will not be explored here. However, whatever the nature of that social change is merely reflected, and not propelled by the change in the N-word being less utilized. The meaning of the N-word going from a derogatory slur when used by white folks turned into an empowering word used by Black folks in the social movement to reclaim language. However, linguistic changes could also prompt social change. The language we use already shape the way we conceptualize the world. Many ancient civilizations lack the word for blue. Not only does this influence the way they describe the world, but they also physically see the world with less blue. Studies conducted demonstrate individuals who speak one of these languages have a harder time distinguishing green from blue than other people. Here, the very difference in the languages people chose to identify colors shape the way they see the world.Case for Linguistic Change Pushing Social Changes in Attitude Towards Gender Non-conforming FolksIn the context of pronouns, there is an opportunity for the change in linguistic conventions to move social change, even though it would be a glacial and nonlinear shift. One reason that social change affects linguistic change is the very “rightness” of adapting language to action. Similarly, de jure changes more naturally follow de facto shifts. The primary source of legitimacy of the law comes from the buy-in from the people. And that buy-in is often reflected in the zeitgeist of morality and social expectations. The problem with linguistic movements affecting social change is rooted in the idea that language merely reflects, not dictate the individual psyche and, more broadly, social attitudes. However, the proposal for linguistic change pushing social change can be rooted in analogy to de jure change moving de facto change. In the Civil Rights Era, the white majority was heavily opposed to a world with integrated schools. Even in the aftermath of Brown v. Board of Education, many people vocally oppose desegregation. This reflected a de jure change attempting to push for de facto shift in social attitudes. However, at the core of the controversy, there is a fundamental and underlying appeal to morality that couples the de jure ruling to forbid school segregation. Although without threat of violence through the law, this force is insufficient to surface social change to desegregate on its own, the legal desegregation forced society to grapple with this moral qualm. Similarly, at the core of the controversy around individuals not respecting others’ pronouns, linguistic change could begin a dialogue to push for social change. Each person has a preferred set of pronouns they feel most comfortable using. A cis-gender man would most likely feel comfortable with the pronouns he/him/his. For Lia Thomas, she prefers people to use she/her/hers pronouns. However, the harm is done when many hostile individuals who deny her personhood insist on using he/him/his pronouns while expressing their disapproval in Lia’s participation in women’s swimming. Linguistic changes that people are making could lead the efforts to respect the gender identity of people like Lia. Like in the de jure desegregation movement during the Civil Rights Era, advocating for the change in the language we use to refer to someone’s preferred pronouns reflect the fundamental desire to be recognized as human. When Lia asks for people to use she/her/hers pronouns, she is implicitly asking for the public to recognize that her way of expressing her gender is just as valid as a cis-gender person’s gender expression. At the root of the linguistic push to urge social change is a similarly fundamental moral demand that individuals who do not conform to society’s gender expectations be equally recognized. Current efforts to correct individuals who misgender others reflect an example of a push for linguistic change that could prompt a broader social change. Just like the prohibition of de jure segregation after Brown, reminding individuals who misgender others that their misgendering is harmful would bring the topic of gender to the forefront. By demanding this linguistic shift to use the proper set of pronouns for individuals who do not conform to their gender identities, I hope to see a world where our conception of gender and sexuality broadens to a complex spectrum of identities rather than a strict binary.You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
|
|
