Sexism in Language and Sex Differences in Language Usage: Which Is More Important?

Abstract

IN AN ARTICLE in the May 1975 issue of College Composition and Communication (pp. 163-67), Muriel Schulz asks, How Serious Is Sex Bias in Language? Her implicit, sensible answer-that some of the targets of current attack are less deserving of indictment than others-may not seem surprising, but to those who have been keeping track of the recent writing on sexism and the English language, Schulz's views about the built-in sex bias in modem English will seem out of the ordinary. The practice has often been to uncover every piece of language data that might possibly suggest linguistic inequality and then to propose alternatives (from new generic pronouns to new lexical items replacing spinster). Unfortunately such unflagging attention has not been given to the other half of the issue: the differences in the ways the two sexes use the English language. Inherent sex bias in the language, or-more accurately-our sensitivity to possible linguistic sexism, will not be a serious concern once extra-linguistic inequalities are done away with. When the social status of women matches that of men, the current linguistic bones of contention will go unnoticed or, at least, seem trivial. In the interest of better understanding why women have been and are still being regarded as second-class citizens, a careful study of the difference between the sexes in their use of the English language would seem to deserve first priority. To be sure, certain of the recent, conscious innovations in English usage repres nt desirable and necessary changes. The continuing attempt to gain widespread acceptance of the title Ms. is not a frivolous campaign; there is no reason, linguistic or otherwise, why women should be thought of or distinguished by speakers of English according to their marital status. And the use of Miss or Mrs. does reflect and perhaps affect our thinking. Terms of address are, as a rule, consciously chosen by the speaker-recall the s metimes embarrassing slip which must be corrected, Mrs.-I mean Miss Jones. Just as a large number of English speakers acknowledge the earning of a Ph.D. degree by addressing all recipients as Dr. and are careful to call members of religious orders Father, Sister, or Brother, he majority of speakers also want to be sure to address a woman by her correct title because the term reflects her place in society.1 By changing the system of address-and this change has not as yet een completely effected-it may be possible to change speakers' patterns of cognition if, as the Whorfian theory of linguistic relativity suggests, our language determines the way we think. It may be possible, but there are difficulties. Though language cannot be stopped from changing, it is not easy, as prescriptive grammarians know, to legislate change in speakers' language systems; speakers must first be convinced of the need for