Call us by name (and professional title)

Prohibiting the use of feminine terms for job descriptors in public documents could have become law, with a fine of up to five thousand euros. It sounds like fake news, but it's not. The brilliant idea came from Manfredi Potenti, a senator from Matteo Salvini's Lega. A man, of course. After the recent controversy, the party itself has backed down on the bill, but the dice is cast, and we've learned quite a bit about both the party and the general consideration that Italian politics and public opinion have about women's work, their careers, and their lives.

Are words like sindaca, rettrice, and avvocata grammatically correct?

Why are these terms so frightening that they need to be banned? The answer is simple: it’s not the words that are frightening, but what they represent, namely the woman-power dichotomy, which creates a strong imbalance within the traditional norms imposed by the patriarchy in this country. I discussed this with Equonomics founder, professor, and feminist economist Azzurra Rinaldi. "The proposal goes against the rules of Italian grammar, which include both masculine and feminine declensions. Under the pretext of protecting the true Italian language, it actually only serves to endorse and highlight the presence of problematic biases," she explained.

Why should we care?

Continues Azzurra Rinaldi: "Language - as linguists like Vera Gheno teach us - is actually representation. So, the fact that we represent a world where professionals like teachers are referred to in the feminine, but engineers are not, reflects a power structure. Language creates reality, and if I don't represent you through language, you don't exist. While this isn't entirely true, given that - despite the gender gap in positions of power - many women hold roles such as lawyer, engineer, and councilor. The idea behind this proposal is that the image should persist where women are confined to the kitchen, at home, and at best, occupy less well-paid positions." The problem, therefore, lies not only in banning feminine terms from public documents but also in the type of profession that is scrutinized through a grammatically incorrect lens filled with prejudices.

"In recent years, there has been a growing focus on language, which has, in various cases (like this one), led to the withdrawal of institutional proposals. In this specific case, after the emerging controversy, the senator who proposed it has fully taken ownership of the proposal, even though it is quite strange that a ruling party like the Lega was unaware of this event. We definitely have a lot to reflect on," she concludes, referring to the importance that public opinion can have on party decisions and how we can exercise our "power" as citizens and women, by honing our dissent.

Women’s reactions to the Lega’s proposal

The controversy that erupted online has provided many reactions and a series of interesting insights, such as those from Giovanna Conte, a contributor for Donne x strada, a non-profit organization focused on gender equality every day. "If women cannot appear in public documents as they are, if they cannot hold top or powerful positions without having to use masculine terms, without having to distort or deny their chosen ways of socializing and their identity, then those women will not truly exist. Those women, all of us, will not exist fully. They will be women of power in a violent system that, even at the top, wants them diminished or nonexistent, like characters in a surreal Italo Calvino story."