DER, DIE, DAS, TEUFEL DICH!

When social scientists decided to bowdlerize demography by replacing the overworked word "sex" (as a noun:  Help Wanted: Female; as a verb:  Help Wanted: Female) with "gender" and then the culture-studies types began overworking "gender" trouble followed.

I was brought up to understand that "sex" was a biological term and "gender," a grammatical term. I understand that some people use the term "gender" as a way of making the point that the actions people take, including acting on their sex, have elements that have evolved over time, something loosely described as "socially constructed." My sense is that your office is using the term "gender" to determine my biological makeup, which is "male." You probably are not interested in my gender, which is "Non-Quiche Eating Real Guy," a category probably deserving of protected status as under-represented around the University.

If academicians had burdened the vocabulary with a few more terms, perhaps Inside Higher Ed contributor Nicholas Henriksen could have a life.  Instead, he offers "Beyond Masculine and Feminine: Teaching Romance Languages in a Nonbinary World."

In the case of Romance languages such as French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese and Catalan, one of the most fundamental aspects of grammar is gender. Nouns, adjectives and pronouns are typically categorized as masculine or feminine, clashing with our more complex, 21st-century understanding of gender identity. This rigid linguistic structure can alienate students whose identities may not fit within the traditional gender binary. It is difficult for them to feel fully seen or respected in the classroom, where they often feel pressured to misgender themselves or prematurely out themselves due to their limited descriptive options.

In a world increasingly aware of the fluidity of gender, this issue is becoming more pronounced.

The problem is not limited to the Romance languages nor is it about boats (das Boot) preferring to be addressed as "she" or garages (die Garage) identifying as male, it is about snowflakey students who see German or Latin grammar as somehow triggering, and possibly oppressive, and the faculty who enable them. No, seriously.

No initiative aimed at fostering inclusivity can succeed without the active involvement of the communities it seeks to serve. In our case, trans and nonbinary departmental members were instrumental in helping us understand the unique challenges they face in the language classroom. Through surveys and direct involvement in the committee, these members of the RLL community provided invaluable insights that shaped our approach.

It’s crucial to listen and learn from firsthand experiences. Misgendering, for instance, can be profoundly painful for students, signaling a lack of recognition or respect for their identity. By ensuring that trans and nonbinary students have a voice in the conversation, we can better meet their needs and create spaces where they feel seen and valued.

How hard is it to explain that grammatical rules of construction come from a different place than the conventions of abnormal psychology?

The solution to the clunkiness of overworking the word "gender?"  More clunkiness.

One of the most significant challenges our department encountered was that most Romance language textbooks don’t account for nonbinary identities. While these textbooks provide valuable grammatical instruction, they often conflate grammatical gender with gender identity, perpetuating a binary understanding of gender.

As our team investigated the evolving linguistic landscape, we found that many cultures where Romance languages are spoken have integrated nonbinary pronouns and gender-neutral options into their languages. However, these innovations are rarely reflected in the textbooks used in U.S. classrooms. As a result, instructors must be proactive in supplementing textbook materials with more inclusive language content.

Predictably, the sermon concludes with an invocation of the Church of Intersectionality.

Language learning should be an inclusive, enriching experience for all participants. However, the binary gender framework that underlies the Romance languages presents unique challenges for trans and nonbinary individuals. By forming an innovative committee, collaborating with stakeholders, providing supplemental information, adapting course materials and launching public awareness campaigns, we’ve begun to dismantle these barriers and create classrooms for all students, no matter how they identify or present in private and/or public spheres.

The steps we’ve taken at the University of Michigan are just the beginning. There is still much work to be done, but these guiding principles can inform efforts to make similar changes in other language departments. Other institutions can join in creating more inclusive models for teaching languages and cultures—models that fully reflect the diversity of our student body and the complexity of gender in the modern world.

What's that quip about ideas so foolish only an intellectual can believe them?