Inclusive and gender-equitable communication builds on a foundation of open-mindedness and mutual respect for each other and our individuality. It helps us avoid prejudice and discrimination. Inclusive language connects people and forms the basis for effective collaboration. Our choice of words is important because it shows how we see the world and others. The goal is not to follow a set of rigid rules, but to foster lively interactions with each other.
Our website shows you how to do this successfully.
What should I keep in mind?
We suggest the following for inclusive, gender-equitable communication:
- If someone's gender identity, disability or other factors play an important role, then please state them clearly and specifically.
Examples:
percentage of female graduates in Physics
women in science
campus accessibility for wheelchair users
- If these factors are irrelevant, then either do not overemphasize them or even leave them out.
Examples:Try this:
Not this:
Why?
Sara Smith earned her doctorate in Psychology. The young woman, Sara Smith, earned her doctorate. Sara's gender doesn't matter. Paul Peterson recently published an article. The blind researcher, Paul Peterson, recently published an article. Paul's disability doesn't matter. - Are you unsure what to do? If possible, please ask the respective person(s) about their preferences. They can tell you how you should address or describe them. We are also happy to advise you – so feel free to contact us.
Examples:
impaired person, person with a disability or disabled person?
person on the autism spectrum or autistic person?
Pronouns: she, he or they?
Tips for inclusive language
Address your readers directly
Speaking directly to your readers is good style in English, and all the more for inclusive communication (see creating English websites).
Examples:
Please submit your application by 15 July.
(instead of: The student must submit his/her application by 15 July)
Use the plural form
This technique is ideal for providing general information that applies to everyone.
Examples:
Students should attend the orientation events in their departments (instead of: the student should attend the orientation event in his/her department).
Use they/their/them
The English language continues to change. In situations where you do not know or do not want to specify a person's gender identity, it is now grammatically correct to use they, their or them (plural) when referring to this person (singular).
Examples:
Your student must turn in their thesis by the end of the semester.
XY earned their bachelor’s degree in French Literature.
Repeat nouns/titles
If you have a longer text where a particular group/title is repeatedly mentioned, you can also reuse the corresponding nouns/titles instead of a pronoun for a particular gender.
Examples:
The lecturer must submit paperwork on time. This means the lecturer follows all deadlines. The lecturer also enters grades into the ZEuS system …
Use gender-neutral titles
Please describe people/functions/job titles using gender-neutral terms.
Try this: | Not this: |
---|---|
sales representative | salesman |
chairperson of the committee | chairman |
speaker/spokesperson for the cluster | spokesman |
Write appropriate honorifics
Options when writing to others:
Honorific | For whom? | Example |
---|---|---|
Mr | men | Mr Alex Smith |
Ms | women | Ms Alex Smith |
Mx | non-binary person | Mx Alex Smith |
Given name and family name | everyone: helpful if gender unknown | Dear Alex Smith |
Plural | groups, if you do not know the specific recipient | Dear Human Resources team |
You can also make it easier for others to address you correctly, e.g. by providing corresponding information in your email signature.
Example:
Sascha Miller (she/her)
#callmebymyfirstname
Avoiding stereotypes and clichés
Gender-inclusive language avoids using stereotypes and clichés that confine people to certain roles (e.g. men work in technical fields, women take care of housework, people with a disability suffer, etc.). Important: Adjectives can have unintentional consequences, e.g. by patronizing others or treating them as sexual objects (e.g. Tina Müller is attractive, emotional, helpful, caring, or nice etc.). Traditional attributes measure people against double standards, e.g. by describing a determined man as "assertive" but a similar woman as "aggressive".
Examples:
Try this: | Not this: | Why? |
---|---|---|
New professors and their families receive a warm welcome at the University of Konstanz. | New professors and their wives receive a warm welcome … | You assume: professor = man |
Conference participants must present their ID badges | Each conference participant must present his ID badge | The implication is that all participants are men. |
People with disabilities
Communication lays the foundation for connection. If, however, our choice of words divides people into categories like "healthy" and "unhealthy", we set up roadblocks to good communication and participation. A disability is the result of interactions between people and their environments. It emerges when there are barriers to participation. For example, visually impaired people cannot use websites where the content has not been designed for screen readers.
Please do not limit people to a certain disability or treat them like victims. Instead, highlight their abilities and focus on the individual persons themselves. However, as you would expect, each person has their own preferences. So, if you can, please ask them for guidance (e.g. whether they describe themselves as an "autistic person" or a "person on the autism spectrum").
Important: Please only mention the aspects of a person's identity that are relevant for the specific context (see What should I keep in mind?)
Examples:
Try this: | Not this: |
---|---|
disabled person | the handicapped |
wheelchair user | wheelchair-bound confined to a wheelchair |
accessible bathroom | handicapped bathroom |
have an impairment | suffer from... afflicted by... |
cerebral palsy | spastic |
Please note: Euphemisms like "differently abled" or "disAbility" could be interpreted as patronizing or as an attempt to gloss over or ignore the real challenges of people with disabilities.