Contents copyright © by D.L. Day - 2001
If our reality is to be inclusive, our language must be inclusive. Inclusive language is not a luxury or political nicety. It is a vital part of change and equality. Words are alive. They are not static or dead on the page. Words are dynamic. They define reality and even call things into being.
A firefighter, for example, need not be a "fireman." To always call a firefighter a "fireman" perpetuates oppressive concepts, locks in a limited imagry and undermines the reality of a firefighter being something other than a fire man. To speak into existence the concept of a "firewoman" changes our reality. Though our concepts have in recent years changed to accept "firefighter" as being a non-sexist description of, "One who fights fires," The image of a "firewoman" probably still goes beyond the image reality our modern public can grasp.
Our words define "what is." As they are compromised, the compromise perpetuates biased or inappropriate concepts of "what is" in our culture. To allow inclusive language to be defined as "politically correct" language , therefor, is an enormous subversion of it's importance and meaning. Inclusive language is simply correct. To say, for example, that all firefighters are "firemen" distorts the reality that some are "firewomen."
A paradigm shift in realty and a shift in language must move in tandem. To have one lag the other too dramatically can put the reality in question in terms of societal acceptance and definition. It is the politics of patriarchy which attempts to minimize and discredit inclusive language by calling it "politically correct." I never let anyone get away with this in my presence. The fundamental concepts at work in being defined by language are understood by every teenage male who, in a search for adult respect, ever said:" Hey, don't call me `Bobbie' anymore, my name is `Bob' now." Why do some of these same people, as grown men, have such a hard time understanding that women are not "girls" and their female boss is not , "Sugar?"
Our language defines our understanding of mutual respect and acknowledgement of true curcumstance. To worship a God who is "He," for example, and claim that "He" is the only God, establishes a male-based hiearchy and immediately puts women somewhere under men.
Inclusive language is very important in the work place. To define the qualifications for a new employee and say what "He" must have, predisposes the reality that a "He" will be hired. To assume in our conversation a physician or lawyer will be a "He" predisposes a reality in our children that "He-s" not "She-s" will be doctors and lawyers. We speak "what is" into being, both immediately and over time. Inclusive language is not "Politically correct" it is correct. It is the only way to keep our own experience in sync with the reallities of the steamroller momemtum of the inevitable shift to an inclusivity paradigm.
For those who are searching for a style book for inclusive language, try Elements of Nonsexist Usage by Val Dumond. It is a guide to inclusive usage of spoken and written English.