16/08/2026
๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐
๐๐ก๐ โ๐๐๐งโ ๐ข๐ง ๐๐๐ง๐ ๐ฎ๐๐ ๐
๐๐ฌ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐ ๐ฎ๐๐ ๐ ๐ฐ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ ๐ญ๐จ๐๐๐ฒ ๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ฏ๐๐ง๐ญ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ฎ๐ฌ ๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฆ ๐๐๐ก๐ข๐๐ฏ๐ข๐ง๐ ๐ ๐๐ง๐๐๐ซ ๐๐ช๐ฎ๐๐ฅ๐ข๐ญ๐ฒ?
Simple things that are now considered normal often receive little thought. We often accept them as they are because they have become ordinary to us. But we cannot change the fact that our daily activities still reflect their history and how they affect people. With the words we speak every day, we don't always notice how differently women's identities can be represented compared to men's.
โMr.โ and โMrs.โ
Why does a woman's traditional title indicate her marital status, whereas a man's does not? A man can be called โMr.โ regardless of his marital statusโhe can be single, married, divorced, or widowed, but his title does not have to state it. A woman, however, has traditionally been address by titles that indicate whether she is married or unmarried.
These titles aren't restricted to English. They are also present in other languages. Smith Galer (2021) explains that across different languages and cultures, women have often been identified through their relationships, marriage, or s*xuality. In Western European languages, married and unmarried women can be distinguished using titles such as โsignorinaโ and โsignoraโ or โmademoiselleโ and โmadame.โ However, male titles such as โmonsieurโ remain unchanged regardless of marital status. In Hindi, โkanya,โ which can be used to refer to a bride, also means virgin, but there is no equivalent term used to describe a groom with the same implication. In Urdu, โtalaq yafta,โ meaning divorced woman, has a derogatory connotation, while there is no corresponding term used for a divorced man.
According to Wright and Delgado (2023), language and behavioral differences between men and women reflect socialization and societal influences rather than biological s*x. This suggests that the way we speak about gender can reflect the expectations society has created around men and women.
The same difference can be seen in the words โbachelorโ and โspinster.โ Although both can refer to an unmarried person, they do not carry the same weight. A bachelor can be thought of as confident, eligible, or simply unmarried. On the flip side, a spinster has historically been associated with an unmarried woman who is undesirable or unlikely to marry. The difference is not necessarily in what the words technically describe, but in what society has taught us to associate with them.
These terms are products of history and culture, yet we continue to use them today, sometimes without considering the assumptions they carry. This makes us question whether the words we use are simply wordsโor whether they reflect the expectations society has placed on women.
These differences, however, are also present in the way we describe people in positions of authority. Chen et al. (2021) discussed how women have gained greater opportunities and responsibilities, but inequalities still remain in various aspects of social life.
In 2018, Atir and Ferguson examined how male and female professionals are referred to in different fields, such as science, literature, and politics. Across eight studies, they found that male professionals were more than twice as likely to be referred to by their surname alone than female professionals. More importantly, people who were referred to by surname alone were perceived as more famous and eminent. In one experiment, scientists referred to by surname were even judged to be 14% more deserving of a National Science Foundation career award (Atir & Ferguson, 2018).
A simple surname may be dismissed as nothing more than a name. But if something as simple as the way we refer to an individual can influence how important or accomplished, they appear, then perhaps language isn't as neutral and ordinary as we think it is.
Despite the appearance of language being neutral and ordinary, it does not only influence how we perceive people; sometimes, it is also a reflection of societal expectations.
These are evident in idioms and expressions. A common pair of expressions that we may hear is โman upโ and โlike a girl.โ When someone tells you to โman up,โ they are encouraging you to be strong, brave, or resilient. But when someone says you do something โlike a girl,โ they often imply that a person is incompetent or displaying weakness.
The same contrast can be seen in the expression โbossy.โ A man who is being โbossyโ may be associated with initiative, confidence, or strong leadership. But when a woman is described as โbossy,โ she may instead be seen as difficult or overbearing. In these expressions, one associates masculinity with strength, while the other uses femininity as something negative.
These differences can also be seen in words such as โmasterโ and its female counterpart, โmistress.โ Although the words historically share a connection, โmistressโ developed another common meaning: a man's extramarital partner. The difference between the two demonstrates how words that once had corresponding masculine and feminine meanings can develop very different associations over time.
These expressions may seem harmless because they are so commonly used, but they can reflect the expectations society places on men and women. Language can reinforce the idea that certain qualities are acceptable for one gender but undesirable for another.
Perhaps this is why the words we use deserve more thought than we give them. They may seem ordinary, but ordinary does not always mean neutral.
โMrs.โ
โMistress.โ
โMadame.โ
Maybe the very thing that should unite usโlanguageโhas also become a barrier that separates people based on s*x and expectations.
Different cultures, different languages, yet a woman's identity has repeatedly been connected to marriage, relationships, s*xuality, and the expectations of others. It does not stop at childhood, nor in the teenage years, nor in marriage, nor even after a husband has died. Language is not merely a collection of words. It is a glimpse into our societyโits norms, history, and reality.
Most of these words are not necessarily insults. Using them does not mean that someone is consciously trying to oppress women. In fact, most people use these
terms simply because they are accustomed to them; it is what they were taught.
But that is precisely what makes them worth questioning.
We inherit words and expressions from people who lived in societies very different from ours, often without truly inheriting the reasons they were created.
But the world has changed. Women today have greater opportunities to speak, study, vote, lead, work, and pursue lives not restricted to marriage. Language may reflect oppression, but it isn't the sole reason gender equality is still being fought for today.
Language is not a wall that single-handedly prevents gender equality. But it can be a mirror that shows us the walls society built before us.
Changing a word will not change the world. But questioning the words we have stopped questioning might be a place to start.
After all, if we want a world where men and women are truly treated equally, perhaps we should first examine the language that has taught us how to perceive them.
Sources:
Atir, S., & Ferguson, M. J. (2018). How gender determines the way we speak about professionals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(28), 7278โ7283. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1805284115โ
Chen, Y., Zhang, Z., & Xia, Z. (2021). Sentiment assessment of brand advertising on gender issues on social network: A case study of femvertising on Sina Weibo in China. In 2021 4th
International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Big Data (ICAIBD) (pp. 360โ364). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAIBD51990.2021.9459034โ
Smith Galer, S. (2021, April 9). The s*xist words that are harmful to women. BBC Future. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210408-the-s*xist-words-that-are-harmful-to-womenโ
Wright, G. W., & Delgado, C. (2023). Generating a framework for gender and s*xual diversity-inclusive STEM education. Science Education, 107(3), 713โ740. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21786โ
๐๐ต๐ช๐ณ๐ณ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ต๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ถ๐จ๐ฉ๐ต. ๐๐ฏ๐ด๐ฑ๐ช๐ณ๐ช๐ฏ๐จ ๐ฅ๐ช๐ข๐ญ๐ฐ๐จ๐ถ๐ฆโ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ณ๐๐๐. ๐ท๐๐๐. ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐.
Written by Avhery Ayessa Francisco
Layout by Cedric Joshua Leonor
