I have shared information about using language that is inclusive of all gender identities in worksheets in the past, particularly pertaining to gender pronouns. However, I have not addressed the occasional resistance to it very much outside of how some do not believe that using “they” as a singular pronoun is grammatically correct. The work that I put into writing about such topics isn’t to control the language of others, but rather to share information in hopes of everyone having a better understanding of why and how more people can be better included in common language. With that said, I do try hard to see where other people with different views are coming from when these responses to gender inclusive language do occur.
With the current topics regarding trans people generally being focused on whether or not transfeminine people should be able to participate in sports, that is sometimes all of the exposure some have to the trans community. While I unabashedly support transfeminine people having fair and equal rights, I will acknowledge that transmasculine, nonbinary, genderfluid, and gender nonconforming people generally receive less attention in mainstream media, for better or for worse. They are often erased from the narrative when people who do not understand who is included in the term “transgender” alone. This was recently the case on Twitter when actress Rose McGowan responded by United States Representative Cori Bush’s tweet advocating for better reproductive care for “Black birthing people.” McGowan claimed that she was “virtue-signaling to trans women,” among a few other claims about how the term was erasing the experiences of cisgender women. Though not only nonbinary people benefit from gender inclusive language, we are often the most blatantly affected by this confusion. Unfortunately, one source of the resistance to gender inclusive language comes from some trans people who identify with the gender binary. Trans people who identify with the gender binary sometimes assert that people who are nonbinary, genderfluid, or are otherwise gender nonconforming are “not really” trans, further erasing any real need for gender inclusive language, even in relation to the trans community. This is false for a few reasons. As I have shared in previous posts, to be trans is to not fully identify with one’s gender that was assigned at birth, which can be to varying degrees. Secondly, anyone can use gender inclusive pronouns, regardless of how they identify, whether they are cis or trans. Lastly, using inclusive language can even affirm people who do identify with the gender binary and allow them to be less polarized in some spaces. A couple of examples include if a cisgender woman is in a field that has mostly men or if a trans man chooses to carry and give birth to his own child. The first probably wouldn’t want to be referred to as a “businessman.” It’s also unnecessary to single her out by saying “businessmen and businesswoman” when referring to her and peers when other language can be used that includes all of them. I also know that transmasculine people often experience discrimination and gender dysphoria due to often being misgendered when receiving reproductive care. While gender inclusive language may affirm some people more than others due to past and current disparities in societal structures, everyone can benefit from it being used. One can never force others to use or accept certain forms of language, but people who do use gender inclusive language as a way to better include either their own identities or that of others in discourse have a few choices in how they handle situations in which they receive pushback for doing so. One way is to ignore it. This can be easier said than done, but as I said before, language is a choice and it isn’t really anyone else’s place to correct yours if you have decided to use gender inclusive language. Secondly, one could investigate the source of why a particular use of gender inclusive language upset someone if they are willing to have a respectful conversation about it. If not, it is fine to excuse yourself and no longer engage them on the topic. However, if they are willing to talk about it, really take the time to listen and see if there was a misunderstanding or another underlying reason why they disagreed with it rather than jumping to conclusions about them as a person or their personal values. Lastly, if it is specifically regarding how you or someone else identify, such as using the singular “they” as a gender pronoun, one can choose to set a boundary ahead of time. Boundaries differ from rules as they pertain only to the person who sets them while rules apply to others. For this reason, consequences are much easier to enforce for boundaries than for rules, as we can each only really control ourselves. A personal boundary in this case could simply be, “I do not engage in conversation with people who intentionally refuse to refer to me by my pronouns or misgender me in other ways.” A consequence of someone violating that boundary could be simply stating that and then disengaging from the conversation. Some may interpret the last suggestion as a way to control the language of others, but I disagree. It is one thing if people are learning and genuinely trying their best, but if people do not respect your personal boundaries, it’s not unreasonable to stop engaging with them for your own well-being. It is fine to share the rationale behind why you use gender inclusive language, either for yourself or others, but at the end of the day people are always allowed to choose for themselves. It is my hope that people who do oppose the use of gender inclusive language would read this post or other writings with similar messages and not see it as an attempt to control them, but rather as a way to embrace our differences. Being nonbinary myself, I don’t want to erase anyone’s identity or assert that they have to be just like me. I would much rather ensure that everyone is included in my language. - Bek Further reading and Works Cited: Darwin, Helana. "Challenging the Cisgender/Transgender Binary: Nonbinary People and the Transgender Label." SAGE, vol. 34, no. 3, 31 Mar. 2020, pp. 357-80, doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243220912256. "Good Practices: Inclusive Language." University of Maryland Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Equity Center, University of Maryland, lgbt.umd.edu/good-practices-inclusive-language. Johnson, Bek. “How to Use Inclusive Language: Gender Pronouns.” Seattle University Writing Center.https://www.seattleu.edu/media/writing-center/worksheets/Gender_Pronouns_Worksheet.pdf Johnson, Bek. “How to Use Inclusive Language: Respecting the LGBTQIA+ Community in Your Writing.” Seattle University Writing Center. https://www.seattleu.edu/media/writing-center/worksheets/Respecting_the_LGBTQIA_Community_in_Your_Writing.pdf. @rosemcgowan. “Birthing People? I’m empathetic to your painful & unfairly traumatic experience @CoriBush but why are you smearing bio-women to virtue signal to trans women? Why can’t we rise together? Your language is creepy. You are gaslighting. What you are doing is dangerous.#DemCult.”Twitter.6May2021. https://twitter.com/rosemcgowan/status/1390451128324837376.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
SUWC Blog AuthorsAny posts on the SUWC Blog are authored by current consultants working to improve, refine and perfect our practice as peer tutors. Find a Post!
January 2024
Categories |