On Being Politically Correct
Friday, February 27th, 2004I’m involved with this on-campus group called Men Acting Against Rape (MAAR) and we do a lot of stuff within the campus community. This coming Wednesday we are putting on a presentation called “Good Sex?” which will consist of a panel of about five speakers answering a bunch of questions submitted anonymously by UCD students. Over the last couple weeks the MAAR guys have been sifting through the 100 or so questions that’ve been submitted in order to find a solid twenty for the panel to answer.
Yesterday Adam (the president), Diego (the vice president), Lisa (our coordinator at the Women’s Resource Center), Tony (another member) and I sorted the latest batch of questions, trying to determine the final cut. A lot of the questions had to be “gender nuetralized” in order to have the question apply to both a large audience and the key speakers but during the course of the question selection process the five of us discussed issues of gendered pronouns. A few of the participants at yesterday’s meeting thought it might be a good idea to use “ze”, the non-gendered pronoun replacement for “he” and “she”. Not having heard this before, I was at first amused and then puzzled. Does society really need to deconstruct age-old lanuage patterns in order to be more inclusive and fair? Or does creating new words to suit a seemingly minute problem open up a potentially overwhelming readjustment of language as we know it?
I’m well aware that various other languages, including Chinese (see wikipedia link here) have gender neutral pronouns but in the process of changing from an established engendered system to a specifically non-gendered one, it seems as though something would be lost. Perhaps the loss would be positive and result in something like an increase in equality between women and men but that seems like a long shot at best. For the time being, the quest to make language politically correct by removing any gendered words seems like a practice in futility.