February 4, 2013 in City

State laws’ last gender-specific terms targeted

500-page bill culminates six-year effort
Rachel La Corte Associated Press

Here’s a look at some of the terms being considered in a final installment of a move to revise more than 3,500 Washington state statutes in order to make them gender-neutral.

• Brakeman: brake operator

• Chairmanship: position of chair

• Dairymen: dairy farmers

• Ex-servicemen: add “or ex-servicewomen”

• Fisherman: fisher

• Flagman: flagger

• Foreman: jury foreperson

• Freshman/freshmen: first-year student(s)

• Longshoremen: longshore workers

• Ombudsman: ombuds

• Penmanship: handwriting

• Ranchmen: ranchers

• Sportsmanlike: sporting

• Sportsmen: sports/outdoor enthusiast

• Stream patrolman: stream patroller

Source: State code reviser’s office

OLYMPIA – In Washington state, dairymen, freshmen and even penmanship could soon be things of the past.

Over the past six years, state officials have engaged in the onerous task of changing the language used in the state’s copious laws, including thousands of words and phrases, many written more than a century ago when the idea of women working on police forces or on fishing boats wasn’t a consideration.

That process is slated to draw to a close this year. So while the state has already welcomed “firefighters,” “clergy” and “police officers” into its lexicon, “ombuds” (in place of ombudsman) and “security guards” (previously “watchmen”) appear to be next, along with “dairy farmers,” “first-year students” and “handwriting.”

“Some people would say ‘Oh, it’s not a big thing, do you really have to go through the process of changing the language,’ ” said Seattle City Council member Sally Clark, who was one of the catalysts for the change. “But language matters. It’s how we signal a level of respect for each other.”

About half of all U.S. states have moved toward such gender-neutral language at varying levels, from drafting bills to changing state constitutions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Florida and Minnesota have already completely revised their laws as Washington is doing.

The final installment of Washington’s bill already has sailed through the Senate Commerce and Labor Committee with unanimous approval. The nearly 500-page bill has one more committee stop scheduled before full Senate debate.

Crispin Thurlow, a sociolinguist and associate professor of language and communication at the University of Washington-Bothell, said the project was admirable.

He said that as language evolves, such efforts are more than symbolic.

“Changing words can change what we think about the world around us,” he said. “These tiny moments accrue and become big movements.”

Clark and former council member Jan Drago – the Seattle City Council has long eschewed the terms councilwoman or councilman – brought the issue to Sen. Jeannie Kohl-Welles in 2006 after they came across references to firemen and policemen in the mayor’s proposed budget, as well as in state law dealing with local-government pensions.

Clark and Drago’s findings sparked the initial gender-neutral language law that was passed in 2007, immediately changing those terms and directing the state code reviser’s office to do a full revision of the rest of the code. A 1983 Washington state law had already required all new statutes to be written in gender-neutral terms, so state officials were tasked with going through the rest of state statutes dating back to 1854 to revise the rest.

As in past bills on the issue that have tackled sections of the state code, some revisions were as simple as adding “or her” after “his.” Others required a little more scrutiny. Phrases like “man’s past” changes to “humankind’s past” and a “prudent man or woman” is simply a “prudent person.”

Kyle Thiessen, the state’s code reviser who has been working on the project along with two attorneys since 2008, said the work was not without obstacles.

Words like “manhole” and “manlock” aren’t so easily replaced, he said. Substitutes have been suggested – “utility hole” and “air lock serving as a decompression chamber for workers.” But Thiessen said those references will be left alone to avoid confusion.

Republican state Rep. Shelly Short, of Addy, has voted against earlier gender-neutral language bills and said she plans to do the same this year.

“I don’t see the need to do gender neutrality,” she said, adding that her constituents want her to focus on jobs and the economy. “We’re women and we’re men.”

Kohl-Welles, who has sponsored each of the gender-neutral language bills, said that while this project hasn’t been her top legislation every year, “overall, it has important significance.”

“I believe,” she said, “that the culture has changed.”

© Copyright 2013 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

There are 10 comments on this story. Click here to view comments >>

Get stories like this in a free daily email