Governing Documents: Staff
POLICY:
LANGUAGE USAGE GUIDELINES
Effective Date:
Revised Date:
April 1985
Review Date:
Approving Body:
President
Authority:
Implementation:
Contact:
Office of the President
Applies to:
All Staff

The University of Manitoba, as an institution of higher learning, has a commitment to high standards in all communications, both written and oral as well as a prominent role in promoting desirable social change. As an employer, it is especially sensitive to the fair treatment of individuals and groups. The University of Manitoba therefore follows guidelines which are designed to avoid communicating in a manner that reinforces questionable attitudes and assumptions about people and sex roles. Often the problem is one of word choices which may be interpreted as biased, discriminatory, or demeaning, even though they were not intended to be. These guidelines will assist administrators in choosing words which are accurate, clear, and free from bias.

Guidelines

Sexism in communications may be divided into two conceptually different categories:

  1. problems of designation, and

  2. problems of evaluation.

Problems of Designation

In the case of sexism, long-established cultural practice can exert a powerful, insidious influence over even the most conscientious person. Nouns, pronouns, and adjectives that designate persons can be chosen to eliminate, or at least to minimize, the possibility of ambiguity in sex identity or sex role. In the following examples, problems of designation are divided into two sub-categories: ambiguity of referent, where it is unclear whether the communicator means one or both sexes, and stereotyping, where the communication conveys unsupported or biased connotations about sex roles and identity.

Problems of Evaluation

By definition, communications should be free of implied or irrelevant evaluation of the sexes. Difficulties may derive from the habitual use of cliches or familiar expressions such as "man and wife". The use of "man and wife" together implies differences in the freedom and activities of each. "Husband and wife" are parallel, "man and wife" are not. In the examples that follow, problems of evaluation, like problems of designation,are divided into ambiguity of referent and stereotyping.

I. Problems of Designation

  • Ambiguity of Referent:


    1. The student is usually the best judge of the value of his counselling.

      1. Choices might include deleting the referent "his", changing to a plural subject (Students are...value of the counselling service they receive), or rephrase (The best judge of the value of counselling is usually the student).

    2. man or mankind (people, human beings, etc.) the average man (average person, people in general), manpower (workforce, personnel, human resources).


  • Stereotyping:

    1. Research scientists often neglect their wives and children.

      1. Acknowledge that women as well as men are research scientists (Research scientists often...neglect their families).

      2. Mothering (noun substitute - parenting, nurturing).

      3. Woman doctor, male nurse, lady lawyer (delete sex description unless necessary to the discussion, then use female doctor, female lawyer).


      II. Problems of Evaluation

        A. Ambiguity of Referent:

        1. The authors acknowledge the assistance of Mrs. John Smith. (Use given names in acknowledgements, e.g., Ms., Miss or Mrs. Jane Smith.

        B. Stereotyping:

        1. men and girls (use parallel terms - men and women, girls and boys, unless specifically wishing to denote adult and child relationship).

        2. woman driver (specify only if necessary and then use female driver).

        3. Staff members and their wives (staff members and their spouses/friends/guests).

        4. The girls in the office (noun substituted - secretaries, staff, office assistants).


      NOTE: A more detailed list of examples of the sexist use of language can be obtained by contacting the Office of the President.