Gentlemen in skirts.
No, I’m not talking about Scottish men or the evolution of fashion (well, not today). I’m just here to talk about a culture that does not fully see women.
The phrase “Gentlemen in Skirts” is one used to refer to lawyers or law students (in my country; Nigeria) who are women. The first time I heard this said was in my first year at the University. My class was addressed that way by a Lecturer of mine. He said, “Good day, Gentlemen and Gentlemen in Skirts.”
Now, to be honest, I didn’t think anything by it (exactly, I didn’t think about how I was been identified) at the time it was first said. It gave sort of an exclusive title/address, sort of a ‘welcome to the club. Here is what we shall name you’ feeling.
Often, the women in the department kept being called ‘gentlemen in skirts’ by lecturers, fellow students and one day, a classmate of mine used it to address us (a group of law students- who were ladies) and a lady, friend and classmate of mine who was standing with us (shout out to Sadiya Ochekliye) asked; “what does that address even really mean? We are women and not gentlemen” and that, for the first time got me to really think about that phrase and it has never sat well with me since then.
How Language shapes our perception of ourselves and others.
Let’s start by saying, English Language being one of the world’s most spoken languages, comprises of a lot of linguistic sexism. Several researches attest to the fact that in its morphology, syntax and semantics; English language excludes women and trivializes what women do. You see it in the generic use of the masculine gender by a speaker (for example, he/his/him to refer to an unspecific person).
Now, I personally do not think that the creators of language intentionally sort to be sexist or exclude women. I think they just didn’t think of women. This is owed to the sad fact that most of the creators of the Languages of the world were not women. The humanity of women was not considered and so the creators of language wrote women into language the same way women were considered in society; as second class citizens.
“The full and equal participation of both women and men in decision making about anything that affects both the sexes, provides a balance that more accurately reflects the composition of society.”
Language is both an instrument of communication and an instrument of knowledge of the world around us. By being an instrument of communication and knowledge, language identifies and labels us; it tells us who we are and is used to tell people who we are.
According to Jimenez Catalan, “by means of language, we shape our view of society, we organize our knowledge; we learn new things and above all, we assimilate the norms and social patterns of our community” (2009).
Sexism, Sexist Language and the Nigerian Legal System.
Sexism is generally conceived as an expression (act, word, image, gesture) that conveys that one sex/gender is by any means, superior to the other.
According to the Cambridge Dictionary, sexist language is any language which excludes one sex or the other, or which suggests that one sex is superior to the other.
Sexist language is the vehicle used to carry sexism through society.
The mind/heart of sexism shown through sexist language assumes that some jobs or positions of power, belongs to a particular gender to the exclusion of the other gender.
Before the 1800s (19th Century), doctors, lawyers and other positions of power/influence could only be men. This was because only men went to colleges or were allowed to learn trades that could create for them financial independence; thereby enabling the men have some form of real influence in the realm of things that made and moved/controlled society.
We can all agree that right now, this is relatively becoming untrue because with the fight for equality in rights and opportunities between the sexes, men and women have both been able to achieve huge feats and continually show that gender is not a limitation. But somehow, the sexist language that the doctor is a man, the president of a country must be a man, the nurse is a woman, the woman campaigning for a position in politics must only campaign for the position of treasurer or secretary, still exists and stills creates stereotypes.
Sexist Language has always been part of our society’s muscle memory. When language is repeated over time, a long-term muscle memory is formed, allowing labels and the stereotypes brought with them to be performed with little to no conscious effort. That is to say, often times, we do not think about what we say when we speak sexist language and when we push forward stereotypes. This is a dangerous way to live.
We can hear these stereotypes fostered by sexism through sexist language, ring loud in our legal system today.
Within the legal system of Nigeria, you hear the phrase “Gentlemen in skirts” being used all the time and in different forms to refer to lawyers who are women.
I hear it when lawyers address Judges who are women as “Sir” in open Court and out of Court. I hear it when people (lawyers, Judges, teachers, non-lawyers) say; “there are no women at the Bar, or there are no women at the Bench”. You hear it when a Judge addresses lawyers in the bar as ‘gentlemen’ not minding that the room is also filled with lawyers who are women.
This is not a call to say that women and their greatness aren’t acknowledged in the legal sector of Nigeria, but I would like to say that sexism and sexist language praises women and their achievements in one breath and then proceeds to not fully see them in another breath.
Sexism and sexist language does no good other than erase people. It renders them invisible and does not see a gender/sex as their full selves.
Sexist language like calling a Judge who is a woman ‘sir’ renders women on the Bench, invisible. The system that benefits from them does not acknowledge them, as them. A title might seem like a little thing until it becomes your identity.
The language used to address or label people should be one that includes all people. It should see them for who they are. It should tell of the truth that; people are enough and do not need any added thing to make them worthy of a title that is due. Judges occupy seats of honour, they have worked too hard to not be seen as their full selves.
Any language that refers to women as men or uses a title used for a man to describe her especially when she has stated what she prefers to be referred to, is sexist and should be seen as sexist language.
To paint a scenario: Imagine someone who has no affiliation with the legal profession/practice, goes through the law journals or judgments of the Courts, and all this person sees, is the fact that the Judges spoken of are ‘sirs’, ‘his lordships’, etc. This person would automatically register in his/her mind that there are no judges who are women in the system or that there is some form of unwritten law against making women, Judges. There is already a distrust of the system.
It was put beautifully by Judge Vanessa Ruiz; a Senior Judge for the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia (D.C), United States of America;
“The judiciary will not be trusted if it is viewed as a citadel of entrenched elitism, exclusivity and privilege, oblivious to changes in society and to the needs of the most venerable. Indeed, citizens will find it hard to accept the judiciary as the guarantor of law and human rights if the members of the Judiciary do not represent the day to day people who are citizens of that society.”
In researching this, I’ve gotten some dissenting opinions from mine on this issue, one of such dissenting opinions, is of a lawyer who told me; “Well I like them being called ‘sir’ it commands more respect and I asked her; “Why does a ‘sir’ command more respect than a ‘ma’ would?”
Why do women have to be called sir to be given ‘more’ respect? Why can’t they be respected completely too as Ma or Ma’am or My Lady or Woman? Everyone deserves to be respected as they are.
One can argue that the Court is not a person. That it is a symbol of an impartial figure who decides on a case based on the facts or evidence adduced and admitted before it. To this argument, I say; I agree but the court needs a vessel, the Court has always needed a vessel and the vessel that carries out the duty of a Court with judicial powers, is a human person. The Court cannot listen, decide on or write a judgment by itself. It needs human person, who is trained, to carry out these duties. This person can be a man or a woman.
According to Wikipedia, there are over 30 Judges who are women across all the courts we have in Nigeria, but whenever a Judge is being addressed; regardless of their gender, is referred to as ‘sir’.
There are no two ways about it, referring to a judge who is a woman as ‘sir’ is sexist. It is sexist language and should not continue to go on. This sexist language shows the perception of our society, our norms and our social patterns. Above all else, it shows how we really see women.
With language, we have the opportunity to shape our social patterns for good, give an accurate representation of people at all levels. I suggest we rise to the occasion and do well.
Looking through other countries and their legal system, we see a progression in the fight for equality. In countries like South Africa, Italy; the judges who are women are addressed as “My Lady”. Other countries are Gender–Neutral or make room for the distinction between women and men judges.
This article is mainly a call to ask ourselves the most basic questions on why we do the things we do. There has to be a reason. And our reason must make sense. Our Language must continually be evaluated to see if it truly sees us and identifies us properly.
How do we change? We start by really seeing each other. Not a perception of what we think or what we want the other person to be, but who they really are.
