by Ophelia King
Eugene R. August, researcher for men's studies, examines anti-male bias in English. In the past anti-male biases in English have rarely been examined. This neglect occurs because many of the anti-female studies have been based on assumptions which are sex-biased.
The primary purpose is to show that women as well as men have shaped bias in speech and writing. August uses the male life cycle to point out three kinds of anti-male usage that are evident in modern English. Gender exclusive language is one that August feels omits males from certain kinds of consideration; gender restrictive language is another attempt to restrict males to an accepted gender role; and third negative stereotypes of males which are dehumanizing, insulting, and potentially dangerous. August uses examples like males can't be parents or victims; "Real Men Don't"; and girls can be tomboys but God forbid that men might be sissies.
August claims that the English language has long had rich vocabulary to insult and ridicule boys. Words like "wimp", "mama's boy", and "pantywaist", August claims, can be used to insult boys from childhood right into adulthood.
While acknowledging that there are words that insult women, August
concludes that "it is time for men and women of good will
to reject and protest such bigotry." August feels the first
task is for teachers and writers to recognize and denounce form
of anti-male/female in language. The results of bias in language
are potentially dangerous: males can be shaped into what society
keeps telling them they are.
by Christine LaValley
This article was published in the University of Dayton Review in the year 1986 after many had already been published about sex bias in the English language from the previous fifteen years. The author was distraught by the focus of those articles because they did not thoroughly observe the fact that anti-male language existed. The audience that the author attempted to capture seems to be feminists and males(ages 22-48), preferably with a higher education and a sense of the topic. August's purpose was to expose the fact that there is anti-male bias in the English language. He defended his thesis by researching several sources and documented them throughout his essay. This established his credibility. I was surprised by the amount of supporting facts, statistics, examples, anecdotes and logic he implemented in this essay. I feel that the types of supporting evidence that August used were very relevant to the essay's topic. The author constructed this essay through the Topical Organization methodology. He organized his research in terms of some of its aspects or parts. August's introduction and conclusion seem to coincide well and express the same points and arguments. August is extremely knowledgeable on this subject because he has written a book previous to this essay, and spent most of his time researching men's studies. He has a strong stance on the topic, and boldly yet ethically and morally supports his position against people who refuse to believe that society's perceptions, and expectations are created by both females, and males alike for both of the sexes.
August defended his first idea, of the three that he highlighted, by using alarming statistics and concrete proof (words used in the English language to back up his original thesis). He provided the phrase "mother of invention" to portray the notion that males are basically non-existent when it comes to parenting. The author included a statistic to appeal to the audience's emotions. He reported that the term "wife and child abuse hides the existence of an estimated 282,000 husbands who are battered annually". I think his purpose was to get the audience off the "female is always the victim" bandwagon. The author defended his second view by using a different tactic then the first idea. He used an anecdote which described how a boy develops into a man, and the complications and pressures that come about as a direct result from the sexually biased language that is directed at the male from society. I felt this was an effective technique to get the audience to see his point of view because he is a male, and can speak from personal experience. The third notion was defended by giving examples of words that do indeed lean toward incriminating the male, found in certain sources. August, also shows that writers in early times have contradicted themselves when trying to explain that the devil is linked to woman( except they referred to Satan as "his "in the excerpt that he provided).
It's everyone's obligation to choose the language they are going to use out in society, carefully and respectfully. People should realize that males are equally just as susceptible as females when it comes to being a "victim" of ignorance.
by Ophelia King
As a women's studies minor, I found the claims made by Eugene August very interesting. I had no clue that language could be the reason that I thought that real men do not cry. Though August argues that men and women shape bias in language, this view remains questionable in my mind.
The research that is done seems to say that everyone has this bad view about males in our society. August argues that we do not see males in our society as mothers. This is true because they are not mothers, they are fathers, and when they take on the roles that are usually associated with the mothers we offer males more pats on the back than we do women who do the job all the time. Not everything in our society slaps men across the face, and this article could have said some positive things because after all how are men controlling a world that has a population that is majority women.
August claims that few studies are done on anti-male biases because people conducting the studies on women are sexist themselves. I would have to disagree with that statement, because we live in a patriarchal society and hear what men have to say all the time. The anti-female bias studies were done so that women could understand themselves and point out to the world how our language degrades women, and form some definition of woman for themselves. August does a good job making language the excuse for men's behavior. The " Real Men Don't" syndrome puts pressure on men, but at the same time that pressure has given most men control over religion, politics, and marriage. If men and women both had equal control over language, how come power is not equally distributed?
August takes another look at words like " mama's boy", "wimp", "sissy", and others to say that these words ridicule boys. What August forgot to mention was the fact that these words are indirectly insulting the woman, not the man.
Although this article does not use a lot of sources, and twists
words around to point at the man, it is very useful to all people.
This research forces society to evaluate what we call English,
imagine ourselves as human beings, not as genders, and change
the way we think, speak, and write.
© Ophelia King ann Christine LaValley, Winona (MN) State University, 30 January 1997. This document may be freely distributed for educational use as long as this notice of its authorship accompanies its distribution.
Return to annotated bibliography on language, gender, and writing.