Sexist Language: Gender-Linked Expressions in Official Communications in the Academic Workplace
Estrella F. Fajardo, Massuline Antonio D. Ligaya, and Joung-Hyun Ham
Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, Vol. 11, No. 3, March 2020, pp. 2546–2551.

Research Summary

Language used in academic institutions does more than convey information; it can also reflect social assumptions about gender and reinforce linguistic conventions that privilege one gender over another. Although universities are expected to promote equality and gender awareness, gender-biased expressions may continue to appear in routine institutional communication. This study investigated the occurrence of sexist language in official communications within an academic workplace, focusing on gender-linked words and expressions appearing in university memorandums.

The study examined 14 official memorandums issued by members of the administrative and management councils of the respondent university. Ten of the memorandums were written by male officials and four by female officials. Each memorandum was manually examined for words and expressions identified in the literature as forms of sexist English usage. The occurrences were counted and subsequently classified according to the type of gender bias they represented.

The analysis found gender-biased expressions in seven of the ten memorandums written by male officials, while none of the four memorandums written by female officials contained expressions classified as sexist. Across the 14 documents, five principal gender-linked forms were identified: freshmen, chairman, Mrs., his/her, and himself/herself. The first two occurred most frequently, with freshmen appearing three times and chairman appearing twice; Mrs. also appeared twice, while his/her and himself/herself each appeared once.

The identified expressions represented several forms of gender bias. The use of freshmen illustrated the masculine generic, in which a masculine linguistic form is used to refer to a mixed-gender population. The use of chairman, including in reference to female department heads, represented gender-linked occupational or positional terminology. The use of Mrs. for female recipients while male recipients were addressed as Mr. reflected non-parallel treatment because Mrs. identifies marital status whereas Mr. does not. Finally, expressions such as his/her and himself/herself were classified as forms that habitually place the masculine form before the feminine.

The study also observed a notable difference according to the sex of the memorandum writers: the gender-biased expressions identified in the sample appeared exclusively in documents written by male officials. The authors cautioned, however, that it was difficult to determine whether such language was used intentionally or simply reflected established linguistic habits. This distinction is important because gender-biased language may persist through convention even when speakers or writers do not consciously intend to discriminate.

Overall, the findings indicate that gender-linked language remained present in formal academic communication within the institution examined. The study therefore drew attention to the need for greater awareness of gender-inclusive alternatives in official correspondence, particularly for generic references, professional titles, forms of address, and paired gender expressions.

Research Contribution

The study contributes to discussions of gender-inclusive language in academic institutions by examining sexism not in literary texts or informal speech but in actual official workplace documents. Its value lies particularly in demonstrating how seemingly routine linguistic conventions—such as freshmen, chairman, and gender-asymmetrical forms of address—can persist in institutional communication. Although exploratory and limited in scope, the study provides a useful starting point for larger investigations of how gender-inclusive language is adopted, resisted, or inconsistently practiced within educational institutions.

Keywords: sexist language, gender-linked expressions, gender-inclusive language, academic workplace, official communication, institutional discourse

Full Text

The full text of this publication is available upon request. Researchers, educators, students, and other interested readers who wish to obtain a copy may contact the author through this website or by email at madligaya@gmail.com.