N.B. – This was published in Asian Correspondent (March 8, 9:00 p.m.) where I write a weekly column (Philippine Fantasy).
The celebration of International Women’s Month is the proper time to analyze a little-known Philippine government memorandum issued in 2005.
Five years ago, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) encouraged those in government to use non-sexist language in their official communications. Issued on March 30, 2005, CSC Memorandum Circular No. 12 aims to promote gender-sensitivity in technical writing outputs like letters and memoranda.
In a primer prepared by its Gender Development Committee in March 2008, the National Statistics Office (NSO) stressed the need to transform language “from traditional usage to a more liberating one.” The use of non-sexist language, according to the NSO, will encourage people “to make a conscious effort to avoid implicit and discriminatory language against women and men.”
The suggestions in using non-sexist language prove to be very useful. There is no debate that the NSO’s following suggestions could help make technical writing outputs more gender-sensitive:
- “Eliminate the generic use of HE, HIS or HIM unless the antecedent is obviously male;
- “Eliminate the generic use of Man, instead use People, Person(s), Human(s), Human Being(s), Humankind, Humanity, The Human Race;
- “Eliminate sexism in symbolic representations of gender in words, sentences and text;
- “Eliminate Sexual Stereotyping of Roles; and
- “Eliminate sexism when addressing persons formally.”
The elimination and consequent substitution of the proper terms could go a long way in promoting a culture of gender-sensitivity in the bureaucracy. Sentences, after all, could be written in a way that uses gender-neutral words.
While the CSC should be commended for promoting the use of non-sexist language, what needs to be assessed is the impact of the memorandum circular which is a mere “encouragement” to be gender-sensitive in the writing of official communications.
Five years after the issuance of the memorandum, have official communications become more gender-sensitive? Has non-sexist language been finally minimized, if not totally eliminated, from the bureaucracy’s everyday lingo?
Notwithstanding the lack of any qualitative study on government’s technical writing outputs, what is clear is that the CSC memorandum is being implemented at a time when government structures remain inherently sexist, as may be gleaned from male references to positions of power and influence. Consider the following:
- Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives remain to be called congressmen.
- Heads of various committees in the three branches of government are still addressed as chairmen.
- The highest official of the land is still gender-defined as reference is made to His Excellency or Her Excellency.
- Legal documents, most often than not, start with the phrase “Know all men by these presents.”
The sexist words currently used reflect the patriarchal mindset of those in power. Despite their periodic denials, the inherently sexist attitudes remain despite the occasional use of non-sexist language.
More than the encouragement to use non-sexist language, it is high time for government to institutionalize the training on gender-sensitivity to complement their drive to be more gender-neutral in their technical writing outputs.
Yes, communication is vital to promoting gender-sensitivity in the bureaucracy. But the use of non-sexist words would be useless if those working in government fail to learn, relearn and unlearn the nuances of patriarchy that informs Philippine society.