58 state bills have tried to ban the use of “todes” and other expressions in the last 4 years. Theme is debated at the STF
The use of words like “all“, made during the inauguration of ministers of Lulahas faced great resistance from conservative groups over the past 4 years.
As shown by a survey of Power360, there were 58 attempts by state and district deputies to ban it in schools and official documents. In 3 of these attempts, laws were passed banning the use of the terms. After minister Edson Fachin suspended a law in Rondônia that prohibited the use of this type of language, the other ministers of the STF are expected to discuss the issue again this Friday (Feb 3, 2023)
What is, however, neutral language?
The movement in Brazil for the adoption of a less sexist language has existed at least since the 1990s, says Ana Pessotto, a PhD in Linguistics from UFSC (Federal University of Santa Catarina) who has dedicated herself to the subject in recent years.
The perception that the use of words ending in “o” excluded people of the female gender in sentences like “everyone has something to say” gave rise to proposals that left both genders more marked. In this case, for example, “all and all have something to say” would be used. This treatment is called non-sexist language.
More recently, non-binary people (who do not identify with either the male or the female gender) have come to defend expressions such as “todes”, where there would be no type of gender marking.
What’s up for debate
The existence of an inherent sexism in language is controversial among linguists. Joaquim Mattoso Camara Jr. formulated, still in the 1960s and 1970s, a theory that is a reference in this field. The linguist said that the final vowel “o” in Portuguese does not work as a masculine mark. “a” works as a feminine mark.
That is, when analyzing the morphology of the words, he maintains that “o” at the end of “lobo” indicates a class of animals, but does not indicate which gender it is. “a” at the end of “loba” is more information: it also indicates that the animal is female.
The linguist Mário Alberto Perini explains this unintuitive statement in his book “Portuguese Descriptive Grammar”:
“Essentially, grammatical gender has nothing to do with sex, and it is perfectly possible to refer to a man using the feminine (the victim, the person, the child) or a woman using the masculine (the spouse, the participant, the character). And, of course, for most cases there is no sex involved: cup, printer, and theory are feminine, but only grammatically. That said, it is undeniable that there is a tendency to correlate gender and sex in the nominals that designate people and certain animals: the man/woman, the teacher, the cat/cat, etc. But this fact has no relevance in grammar, because a feminine as a teacher (which designates a woman), one as a person (which can designate both a man and a woman) and one as a cup (which designates neither male nor female of any kind) ) are grammatically identical in their behavior. In particular, they work in the same way for concordance purposes.”
Some critics of neutral language are based on this analysis to say that the use of “todos” would not be an indicator of machismo in the language, since the vowel “o” would not be indicating gender.
In the opposite camp, advocates of change warn of a scientistic interpretation of the theory. Ana Pessotto stresses that the lack of an “o” is not noticed by many speakers. “If you have the common sense of thinking that “o” is masculine and “a” is feminine, is it that people are not interpreting it differently?”, asks the linguist, who advocates for an update of the interpretation of Mattoso Câmara’s theory in the light of current demands from society. According to this other line of reasoning, if there is a perception by some groups that the use of articles is exclusive, the topic deserves to be discussed.
“It would be very difficult to say from a linguistic point of view that the language is sexist. On the other hand, [essas iniciativas de promoção da linguagem neutra] serve to draw attention to the social and political issue of misogyny in people’s discourse”says Francisco Ramos Barbosa Filho, professor at UFRGS and organizer of the book with the collection of articles “Neutral Language – Language and Gender in Debate”.
Upwards
The idea of institutionalizing this type of communication is seen by some specialists with reservation. Stanford University (USA) recently had to back off its Harmful Language Elimination Initiative (read on here the list of words that would be the target of the action).
The aim was to encourage people to suppress terms deemed offensive to specific groups, but there were many reactions to the list of “damn” words, and the suggestion to eradicate them was considered censorship. “Certain changes don’t work top-down“, defends Ana Pessoa.
The linguist cites the example of the pronoun “hen” in Sweden (which can be used for “he”, “she” or when the gender is not known). The pronoun was:
The) suggested by linguists and activists;
B) gradually incorporated by the feminist and LGBTQIA+ community;
ç) started to be adopted by the media and
d) only later (in 2015) was it made into a dictionary.
A similar movement, starting from society, happened with the use of the English terms “Mrs” (lady) and “Miss” (miss). When referring to a woman, English speakers used one of two forms of address, which necessarily indicated marital status. “Mrs” informs that the woman is married and “Miss” that she is single.
The same differentiation, however, does not occur in relation to the male gender. “Mr.” (sir) is used for both married and unmarried males.
From the 1970s, feminists in the United States began to advocate the use of a 3rd form of address, so that women would not be recognized by their marital status: “Ms”. The use gradually gained traction and was recognized in society as a regular form of treatment for women.
In 2013, linguist Paul Baker published an article (full 300 KB)– showing that the use of the word “Ms” in texts written in English quadrupled from 1991 to 2005. Even so, it is not the majority use (it is in 11% of cases). Anyway, writes Baker, the use of titles before names seems to be being abandoned, which would be positive for those who fight for gender equality. “If the trend continues over the next 20 to 30 years, all forms of English gender addresses will be very rare.“, he wrote.
Another example of change in the English language is the exchange of “BC” and “AD” (abbreviations that in Portuguese correspond to “before Christ” and “after Christ”) by “BCE” and “CE” (“before the era common” and “after the common era”).
For over a century Jewish scholars have preferred to use the latter form to designate historical dates. It is said to be religious neutrality, as it avoids designating an entire era by referring to Jesus, the most important figure in the Catholic religion. The use of “common era” gained more followers from the 1980s onwards and became common, but it is still not predominant.
Effectiveness of changing the language
Another point discussed is the effectiveness of adopting a new form of communication in changing prejudiced attitudes. “Is it worth changing the forms of expression in the language without changing social determinations? The material arrangements of society? What comes before?”, questions Barbosa Filho.
The linguist explains that there are currents that defend the need to first change the way of saying so that societies change later. And hence the emergence of manuals, such as Stanford’s. “It is a position that in philosophy we would call pragmatist, which will support the hypothesis that what we say changes the world. What will be called natural language performativity. Those who produce these manuals believe in this hypothesis“, he says.
However, argues the linguist, “nothing guarantees that a speaker using ‘todes’ will identify with this ideological position. It may simply be fulfilling a social expedient“, says the UFRGS professor, citing parodies that already use “todes”.
The philosopher Francisco Bosco, who has dedicated himself to studying the effects of the adoption of identity guidelines by the left in recent years, disagrees with the notion that a change in language, by itself, brings about social changes. But he cites other effects that may help with these changes.
“The perspective according to which language is an instance of naturalization and reproduction of prejudices seems irrefutable to me. Avoiding certain words and promoting others (such as neutral language) certainly does not solve social problems, but it does contribute to minorities feeling more recognized, and this has real social effects“, it says.
In Brazil, for the time being, there have been few attempts by state legislatures to institutionalize a language change, as shown by the survey of Power360.
On the other hand, there were numerous projects (58) to ban this type of use. This could indicate an ongoing change in customs, which some are trying to stop.
policy option
The new government has indicated sympathy for adopting neutral language. At least 6 of his ministers used this form of communication during their inaugural speeches.
In recent years, flying this flag has helped the LGBTQIA+ movement achieve greater visibility for non-binary people. There will be even more visibility when Fachin’s injunction that suspended the language ban in Rondônia is voted on by the other STF ministers. The theme will go to the virtual plenary of the STF this Friday (Feb 3).
Part of the left sees political risk in a defense of this agenda by the government.
As shown by the survey of Power360, there was a conservative wave with 58 projects trying to ban the use of this type of communication in state legislatures. In the Chamber of Deputies, there were 12 proposals in the last 4 years.
There is a segment of society that strongly rejects the idea of neutral language. In this segment are evangelicals and members of conservative parties, such as Republicans and Progressives, whom President Lula wants to get closer to in order to obtain votes on agendas of interest to the Executive.
Politicians who represent this part of society consider neutral language an affront to the family model they defend (without LGBTQIA+) and use the theme to unite conservatives.
“There is no doubt that the promotion of neutral language – especially by state bodies; or rather, in this case, the government – intensifies the polarization. But it must be taken into account that the moral panic has been triggered by ultraconservatives even when dealing with programs that seek to guarantee elementary rights to minorities, as was the case of the so-called (by them) “gay kit”, which was, in fact, , a program to combat homophobia, not homosexual proselytism”, says Francisco Bosco.
The author of “The possible dialogue: For a reconstruction of the Brazilian public debate” sees the clash with concern. “Brazilian society, in addition to being largely conservative, is subject to a process of radical polarization that makes members of each side very resistant to the agenda of the other side. So, in the end, neutral language is perceived by a large part of Brazilian society (I don’t have research on this; it would be useful to have them) as an attempt to impose an ultra-progressive agenda, which only meets the concerns of an elite liberal”, said Bosco in an email interview with Power360.
The philosopher is against the use of neutral language in official events. “I am against. Among the three Powers, I think that the Executive is the only one that does not have the legitimacy to institute this use. Lula is the president-elect, but neutral language was not discussed during the campaign. The Legislature could have this discussion (the conservatives would probably win), or the STF should judge the problem (the progressives would probably win)”.
THE Power360 does not use neutral language in his texts. “The editorial policy of the digital newspaper always obsessively seeks neutrality in fact-finding. The use of this form of communication is, today, still strongly associated with one of the political fields. This digital newspaper’s code of conduct demands, when dealing with complex issues, respect for the most diverse points of view”, says Fernando Rodrigues, editorial director of the Power360.
#Understand #discussion #gender #language