Language evolves as humanity evolves. We know this. History has proven it over and over again.
And yet, there’s still so much resistance when certain linguistic changes are tied to gender issues. The introduction of they/them pronouns comes to mind as an example. Many well-meaning, grammar nerds (myself included) bristled at the thought of incorporating this kind of language, even if they fully supported the idea behind the concept.
But when we get too stuck in the weeds of semantics, we miss the opportunity for vital transformative conversations.
Take for instance a video that came out around 2021—and the debate it sparked—when a little girl questioned why things were “man-made,” rather than “people-made.”
In the clip (whose source is undetermined but shared across several platforms) the girl passionately explains to her mother how she heard the term in her social studies class, and how much it irked her, since it seemed to only regard men as creators.
“Aren’t women building the Eiffel Tower or something? Aren’t women allowed to build stuff?!” she exclaims.
She then refers to Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, which stated that “all men are created equal.”
“Aren’t women created equal too? Why don’t they say all people are created equal?!” she prods.
Down in the comments, people applauded the little girl’s hilarious gusto.
“You go girl. Little genius,” one person wrote.
Another added, “keep that critical thinking cap on, little mama.”
As to be expected, many people also commented on how the little girl’s argument was unjustified, since, linguistically speaking, it is implied that both men and women are included in the word “man.”
“She is missing the point! Man in this sense is a plural word, meaning man and woman,” one person wrote.”
Another added, “I am so over this. Man made = huMAN, woMAN, MAN! The term is already inclusive of all genders. Stop looking for problems where there aren’t any. I’m so sick of this nonsense.”
But is it really nonsense? After all, we need only look to our Constitution to know that women have certainly not always been included in language that pertains to “all men.” Or we could look to all the many instances throughout history in which patriarchal values (that is, values which undermine a woman’s inherent and equal worth) silently shaped the way we lived our everyday lives.
Not to mention that this argument denies language’s true nature—to change along with our own levels of awareness. Perhaps the reality is that this little girl is performing her job as a member of the younger generation, by questioning things older generations might take for granted. After all, we don’t create change by not asking uncomfortable questions.
Bottom line: we have not always been an inclusive society. It is reflected in our language. As we collectively continue to become more inclusive, so too will that be reflected in our language. That’s a good thing. It’s a marker of progress. Think of all the energy we spend combating these inevitable changes when we could instead allow them to help us grow as people.