This paper looks briefly at problems that can result when EFL students learn sexist language. It discusses the reasons for and politics of devoting classroom time to raising students' awareness of this issue. Advice for teachers includes a sample Worksheet on Avoiding Sexist Language (permission granted to photocopy) and some suggestions on how the Worksheet may be used. The paper ends with a list of books and articles related to sexist language and ESL/EFL that teachers may use to educate themselves.
Why Teachers Need Be Concerned
Imagine the possible consequences to a student who has studied a presumably up-to-date English textbook entitled Business Basics. It teaches students how to address business letters to an unknown reader: in Britain one starts off the letter, "Dear Sirs," and in America they write, "Gentlemen" (Grant & McLarty, 1995, p. 167). The student picks the appropriate opening by country and writes a letter asking for a job. The personnel manager who reads the letter happens to be a woman who gets irritated with this "sexist fool" before she even reads the body of the cover letter. Of course he does not get the job.
One could argue that it is not the duty of EFL teachers to cure their students of sexism, but should we teach Japanese students who in their first language would use san or sama, courtesy titles which do not distinguish by sex or marital status, to take up a new sexist practice in English which could damage the image of themselves or their company? Students need the knowledge to avoid inadvertent sexist practices such as adding a Mr. to all the names on a computerized mailing list or addressing all adult women as Mrs. Family Name.
Students need to be empowered to: (a) control the judgments that will be made of them according to how they employ gendered language; (b) judge the messages coming their way; (c) understand why they will encounter different historical and current versions of gendered English; and (d) consider how their own language choices ultimately contribute to the evolution of the English language and to relations between the sexes.
The Politics of the Teacher's Stance
Benson (1997) wrote about the political implications of learner autonomy:
Language teaching methodology tends to promote the view that learners want to learn how to use the language but not learn about the language or its social contexts of use...language learning is reduced to a technical activity divorced not only from politics but also from social relationships of any kind. (p. 27)
Maintaining silence in the foreign language classroom about language issues of contention among native speakers, or acting as if native speakers all pretty much use the language in the same way, is a political decision. Peirce (1990) addressed the TESOL community thusly:
If we as English teachers wish to help our students to gain control over the language that we teach, we need to alert students to the current terrains of struggle that characterize the language and into which the students enter as they learn the language. (p. 106)
Teaching about sexist language also raises the political issue of "appropriacy." Wolfson (1989) discusses beginning second-language speakers of English who worked as waiters and seem to have learned the phrase "Are you ready to order, dear?" as an unanalyzed chunk, unaware of the sociolinguistic aspects of dear. Wolfson says that teachers need to warn students that a dear addressed to a woman may irritate her, because such terms are used to address men and women in unreciprocal ways and are thus sexist. Wolfson explains that men will be addressed by someone such as a salesclerk by the more respectful sir while women are addressed as dear.
In addition to Wolfson's concern that learners not give offense, I would add that learners also need to recognize when someone is speaking to them offensively and know how to defend themselves appropriately. Teachers may need to teach students pragmatic skills such as "instrumental rudeness...breaking the politeness rules just enough for people to stop and attend to what you need" (Beebe, 1994, p. 5). Teachers can "help learners claim the right to speak" (Peirce, 1995, p. 26), but they will not be helped much by EFL textbooks, that according to Wajnryb (1996, p. 291) model a world that is "safe, clean, harmonious, benevolent, undisturbed, and PG-rated."
Wolfson warns against learners addressing unknown women with dear, and perhaps she would also warn men not to call any male dear, because she presumes a "need for language learners to learn to use appropriately sex-linked forms of speech" (1989, p. 185). She says that schools may be justified in preferentially hiring teachers of a particular gender in order to "give language learners exposure to both male and female models so that they can acquire gender-appropriate speech behavior by observation and emulation" (p. 185). Wolfson assumes that TESOL students will not want to transgress expected gender roles. Teachers of Japanese may make the same assumption about their students. Tsuruta (1996) found that female Japanese college students preparing for careers as Japanese as a Second Language teachers had to be prodded into even considering the question of whether female speakers really need to be trained to use feminine expressions.
In fact, we teach a variety of students who have their own ideas about "appropriate" speech. Some may have homosexual, bisexual, or transgender identities. Some women may want to speak more like men to challenge the patriarchal system, and other women, in order to advance in the workplace (see Cameron, 1994, whose critique of assertiveness training for women is also of relevance for teachers of cross-cultural communication styles). Some students may simply be tired of monitoring their speech in Japanese to maintain a feminine or masculine persona and therefore welcome the chance to worry less about that sort of "appropriacy" when they speak English. McMahill (1997, p. 613) says that "native Japanese-speaking women in particular may perceive English as allowing or requiring them to express themselves more directly and specifically than Japanese does... and thus as undermining prescribed feminine linguistic roles." Siegal (1996, p. 363) discusses adult Western women learning Japanese in Japan, who showed "some resistance toward using language forms (which they saw being used by women) that mirrored what the learners thought was 'too humble' a stance or 'too silly.'" As Peirce (1995) argues, second language learners are active agents who use language not only to reflect, but to create their social position.
What Teachers Can Do
Teachers need to inform themselves (see Appendix B for Suggested Readings) and then consider what language they are modeling and how much lesson time to devote to sociolinguistic variation and critical awareness. Should teachers teach their EFL students to say "somebody forgot his notebook," "somebody forgot his or her notebook," or "somebody forgot their notebook"? If we hope that our students will someday use English to communicate internationally with real people and not just for test-taking, we need to teach all these varieties, just as we teach forms appropriate for differing levels of formality and intimacy. As long as other teachers and test-writers may demand sexist forms for reasons of supposed linguistic purity or conservative politics, our students need to know them. However, they also need to be taught alternatives and to understand why they are being used and how their use may be interpreted. It is not fair to just suddenly say that "his notebook" is wrong, because it may cause students to doubt their own memories or the competence of other English teachers. Students may be interested or relieved to learn that even native speakers have trouble with gendered language. Native speakers may by habit still sometimes say, for example, policeman when their conscious preference is police officer. We should tell students that native speakers worry about pronoun choice or whether to refer to someone as a girl, lady, or woman.
Teachers can alert students on a piecemeal basis, as sexist discourse arises in classroom materials and classroom talk. For example, I can tell my students that it is better to ask me if I have children than to first ask how many children I have. Students can analyze their textbook dialogs, counting how many dominant speech acts (orders, advice, evaluations, etc.) and how many submissive speech acts (apologies, requesting permission, etc.) are performed by women versus men. Or teachers can introduce the topic of sexist language as an entire lesson or unit.
A Sample Lesson on Avoiding Sexist Language
I have found that doing parts A and B of the Worksheet in Appendix A can take at least an hour with university students who are not particularly strong in English. (I based much of Part B of this paper's Worksheet on the examples of sexist language listed on the back cover of the 1980 edition of Miller and Swift's Handbook of Nonsexist Writing.) After some explanation, I have the students rewrite the exercise sentences to eliminate sexism. My students are generally quick to spot the most obvious sexism in the questions, but many cannot correct the texts until we do a few questions together. None of my Japanese university students, for example, could recall ever having been taught the useful word spouse. Or students may correct one word on a question but miss other layers of sexist nuance.
In Part B, number 11, for example-"The movie is about an aggressive lady lawyer and an ambitious young lawyer defending a rich company president"-a student may substitute woman for lady. However, why is the sex of one character mentioned and not the sex of the other two? And why is the female lawyer described as "aggressive," a rather negative-sounding word, while the male lawyer is described as "ambitious,"which may be a more positive-sounding word for the same behavior?
In B,12-"A man with a working wife has trouble if his company transfers him to another city"-the teacher can simply check that students change this to "an employee with a working spouse," or the teacher can discuss how the work of women within the home is not counted as "work."
B, 4-"Man needs the same basic things that animals need-life, food, and access to females"--demonstrates the imprecision, sexism, and absurdity that use of the pseudo-generic man leads to when speakers forget that not all humans are male. This sentence also reveals the sexist assumption that males choose and take females and not vice versa, and also the heterosexist assumption that all individuals are interested in the opposite sex.
These Worksheet questions can also be used to demonstrate the fact that no rule will fit every situation. B,10-"Mr. Takahashi and his neighbor's wife took the same bus" would be in no need of correction if this sentence were the opening of a love story told from the point of view of Mr. Takahashi. Otherwise, his neighbor's wife should probably be changed to his neighbor, because the original sentence suggests that this woman has no independent existence apart from her husband.
Note that Parts A and B of the Worksheet provide meaningful and motivating ways to get students to naturally engage in a useful grammar review. As my students rewrote sentences to avoid he or his, they were actually finding it interesting to transform sentences by changing singular to plural or by employing a relative clause (Anyone who registers on time will be able to go). Part E; Delicate Words can help students avoid common basic errors such as "Mr. John" while also examining more subtle points of current usage by speakers of various ages around the world.
Conclusion
I have found that either one full lesson or several quick comments scattered over a whole school year can do much to raise students' awareness of sexist English. Whether it can change already ingrained sexist habits (such as saying "Thank you, sir" to women ) is another question, so I hope that other teachers and materials writers will join in by not teaching sexist language to begin with.
Gendered language is a tricky subject. Students need to know that the English language is changing quickly and no teacher can tell them which forms they will be encountering ten or twenty years from now. There seem to be no solutions that currently satisfy everyone, but knowledge, encouragement, and practice can help students decide on and implement the choices that make sense for them. And it does not take much time to warn students against some of the most common and potentially offensive pitfalls and thus contribute substantially to their future success in communicating.
References
Beebe, L. M. (1994, October). Rudeness: The neglected side of communicative competence. Paper and handout presented at the annual meeting of the Japan Association for Language Teaching, Matsuyama, Japan.
Benson, P. (1997). The philosophy and politics of learner autonomy. In P. Benson & P. Voller (Eds.). Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 18-34). London: Longman.
Cameron, D. (1994). Verbal hygiene for women: Linguistics misapplied? Applied Linguistics, 15 (4), 382-398.
Grant, D., & McLarty, R. (1995). Business basics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McMahill, C. (1997). Communities of resistance: A case study of two feminist English classes in Japan. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 612-622.
Miller, C., & Swift, K. (1980). The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing (1st ed.). New York: Lippincott & Crowell.
Peirce, B. N. (1990). Comments on Bronwyn Norton Peirce's "Toward a pedagogy of possibility in the teaching of English internationally: People's English in South Africa": The author responds... TESOL Quarterly, 24, 105-112.
Peirce, B. N. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 9-31.
Siegal, M. (1996). The role of learner subjectivity in second language sociolinguistic competency: Western women learning Japanese. Applied Linguistics, 17 (3), 356-382.
Tsuruta, Y. (1996).Blind to our own language use? Raising sociolinguistic awareness of future jsl teachers. In C. P. Casanave & A. D. Yamashiro (Eds.), Gender issues in language education (pp. 114-124). Fujisawa City: Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Campus (SFC).
Wajnryb, R. (1996). Death, taxes and jeopardy: Systematic omissions in EFL texts, or life was never meant to be an adjacency pair. In ELICOS Association: 9th Educational Conference (pp. 291-306). Sydney.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. Cambridge: Newbury House.
Appendix A
AVOIDING SEXIST LANGUAGE: A WORKSHEET
A. Can you think of a better word for the words below; one that can be used for either a woman or a man?
businessman a rich man fireman policeman fisherman
cameraman sportsman repairman waitress actress
housewife husband or wife freshman stewardess
B. Underline the sexist part of each sentence and explain the problem. Then rewrite the sentence so that it doesn't discriminate against women.
- Somebody forgot his notebook.
- A three-year-old may be able to feed and dress himself.
- Look at that dolphin! He's jumping.
- Man needs the same basic things that animals need--life, food, and access to females.
- ...an explanation even a housewife can understand.
- Doctors and their wives often go to expensive restaurants.
- The movie makes even adults feel like small boys again.
- Jim is chairman of the Music Group and Mary is chairperson of the Art Group.
- Susan wants to take English Conversation lessons man-to-man.
- Mr. Takahashi and his neighbor's wife took the same bus.
- The movie is about an aggressive lady lawyer and an ambitious young lawyer defending a rich company president.
- A man with a working wife has trouble if his company transfers him to another city.
- The park has a pretty man-made lake.
- Children of that age still need a lot of mothering.
- The company needs more manpower because now they need to man the computers twenty-four hours a day.
- Anyone will be able to go if he registers on time.
- I dream of a world of peace and brotherhood.
- My brother is a male nurse.
C. If you have to write a business letter and you don't know the name of the person you are writing to, what greetings can you use? Is "Dear Sir," "Dear Sirs," or "Gentlemen" OK? If you know someone's name but you don't know if they are a woman or a man, how can you start a letter?
D. In English and other languages you know, which order has usually been used?
husband and wife / wife and husband
father and mother / mother and father
he or she / she or he
Mr. and Mrs. Smith / Mrs. and Mr. Smith
gentlemen and ladies / ladies and gentlemen
E. Delicate words: Think about your own first language. At what age do people call someone a boy, a girl, a man, a woman? Is it the same for both sexes?
Different English speakers often have different ideas about what people should be called. Which word we use depends on where we live, the sex of the person speaking and the sex of the person being spoken about, how well we know the person, how old, rich, and powerful both people are, if we are in a work or a social situation, etc.
Look at the list of words and the sentences below. Try putting different words in the blanks. Who do you imagine might say that sentence? Who would they be talking to? Who would they be talking about? Which words sound strange in which blanks?
Mr. Ms. Miss Mrs. everyone miss madam ma'am mister sir boy guy girl man woman young man young woman lady gentleman ladies and gentlemen everyone women and men you buddy mate honey Mary John Jones
There's a ________ at the door.
It's nice to meet you, ________ Brown.
Would you like some more coffee, ___________?
Excuse me, _______, you dropped something!
Hey, _______, get the hell out of here!
Thank you for waiting, __________.
What are you ________s doing tonight?
Hi, __________.
Hello, ____________.
(Introducing someone) This is ___________.
Appendix B
Suggested Readings
Language, Gender and Second Language Teaching
Casanave, C. P., & Yamashiro, A. D. (Eds.). (1996). Gender issues in language education. Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Campus (SFC).
McKay, S. L., & Hornberger, N. H. (Eds.). (1996). Sociolinguistics and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chapter 7, Language and gender by R. Freeman & B. McElhinny. (pp. 218-280).
Sunderland, J. (Ed.). (1994). Exploring gender: Questions and implications for English language education. New York: Prentice Hall.
Wolfson, N. (1989). Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and TESOL. Cambridge: Newbury House. Chapter 8: Language and Sex. (pp. 162-187).
Theoretical and Historical Background, Usage Information, and Guidelines
Cameron, D. (Ed.). (1990). The feminist critique of language: A handbook. London: Routledge.
Frank, F. W., & Treichler, P. A. et al.. (1989). Language, gender, and professional writing: Theoretical approaches and guidelines for nonsexist usage. New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
Maggio, R. (1992). The bias-free word finder: A dictionary of nondiscriminatory language. Boston: Beacon Press. (Contains 5,000 entries with 15,000 alternatives and also twenty-four pages of guidelines.)
Miller, C., & Swift, K. (1980). The handbook of nonsexist writing. New York: Lippincott & Crowell. Also published as The handbook of non-sexist writing for writers, editors and speakers. (1989). London: The Women's Press.
Prentice, D. A. (1994). Do language reforms change our way of thinking? Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13, 3-19. (A naturalistic experiment on the effect of correcting sexist language in college students' papers.)
Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed.) (1994). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. See pp. 46-60, Guidelines to Reduce Bias in Language.
Current Usage
Bebout, L. (1995). Assymetries in male/female word pairs: A decade of change. American Speech, 70, 163-185.
Ehrlich, S., & King, R. (1994). Feminist meanings and the (de)politicization of the lexicon. Language in Society, 23, 59-76.
Gramley, S., & Patzold, K.-M. (1992). Using English: modes of address. A survey of modern English (pp. 287-301). London: Routledge.
Gramley, S., & Patzold, K.-M. (1992). Language and gender. A survey of modern English (pp. 260-286). London: Routledge.
Holmes, J. (1993). Sex-marking suffixes in written New Zealand English. American Speech, 68, 357-370.
Meyers, M. W. (1990). Current generic pronoun usage: An empirical study. American Speech, 65, 228-237