display

Tagesschau and Deutschlandfunk, DUDEN Online, my son's new school: I encounter breaks in speaking, asterisks and neutralizations more and more often.

In the beginning it was very slow, now it suddenly seems like a big wave.

Language has never been too fast for me so far.

I could watch it grow and follow it this way and that.

But the current change scares me.

It reminds me of a meat grinder.

As a copywriter and journalist, I don't understand how so many media outlets can take part - they're text professionals with a feel for language.

As a single mother, I feel very short of time and alone when faced with full-time gender officers and entire broadcasters.

But I want to defend this language!

It should not be destroyed - and there must be more people who do not want to allow it!

I would like to explain my reasons to you in more detail.

What is language usage?

What is prescribed?

display

First of all, I would like to make it clear that of course I also go to the doctor and I am a copywriter myself.

But this use of the feminine form has developed in linguistic usage.

It is different when a state prescribes the use of language by law, regulation or decree

- that's what we call coercion.

And even if gender equality officers in universities distribute guidelines on gender-sensitive language, this is not a natural language development.

Standardizing language through force and pressure leads to bondage.

There is no free language requirement.

So far, dictatorships like the Third Reich or the Franco dictatorship were more known for this.

I find it shameful that a democracy intervenes so strongly in such an important tool of freedom and perceive it as a loud alarm signal.

Missing topic: gender tends to harm emancipation

In addition, from my point of view, gender language achieves the exact opposite.

As a woman, at least I don't want to be constantly addressed in my gender role.

That is not emancipated.

It sounds like women are a victim group that needs special address.

But I wasn't a victim at all!

display

Words usually don't have to be changed at all.

You just take in new content.

Example: “eco” used to be a dirty word, today it is a seal of quality.

The “drawer” at Ikea is different from the one in our head.

Whereas in the past voters were only men, today there is a mixed crowd going to the ballot box in front of the mind's eye.

And yes, the plural is masculine.

But that is our history!

The world used to be strongly male-dominated.

Why rob the words of this information?

Let's leave them the past and fill them with additional content!

That happens all the time: Today a pure women’s evening can (still!) Be perceived as wonderful without undertones.

Or who still thinks of dogs when they mess up the language?

Splitting and sexualization through language

When I think of ice-skaters on a lake, I imagine women, men and children in winter clothes sliding over the ice, falling on their butts, etc. When we talk about ice-skaters in the future, I will no longer see a group of people.

The children are missing.

The diverse ones too, by the way.

I see a group of male and a group of female skaters.

I have to stand with the women and the men are somewhere else - yes, suddenly it's not about winter anymore!

Through gender we are suddenly sexualized.

Images in the head are dissolved.

The masculine plural form has long been there for all of us.

Why are we suddenly separated again?

Key messages are lost

Due to this division between men and women, key messages are also lost.

When I say, “There are more and more losers in our society,” then I'm talking about the gap between the winners.

When it says in future: “There are more and more losers in our society”, the focus will shift from the groups of losers and winners to the groups of women and men.

But it's not about them at all!

And by the way, where are the children and also the diverse ones here?

The language is getting worse

display

During my training as a journalist, I learned that sentences become more understandable the more precisely you name the actors.

When the headmaster now speaks of teachers, I think: I don't want my son to be taught by a force.

Should the media, educational institutions and online dictionaries succeed in making generic masculine forms politically incorrect in the future, people will still try to avoid the long naming of both.

The result will be that people will be more and more "neutralized" in our language.

Do we really want that?

A world full of teachers, horticulturists, assistants, executives, press people, guest people, riding people, ship people - and others.

What does it do to us?

Grammatically wrong

In addition, the use of the substantiated participle is wrong.

The runner is something different from a runner.

On the way to daycare, I can be called a sprint from time to time, but I'm definitely not a sprinter.

Loss of history, sensuality and beauty

So after we haven't gained anything with gender language, in the end we also lose so much: beauty, melodies and history.

In contrast to the seafarers, the seafarers lack any glory!

Will angels still be allowed to watch over our children's dreams in the future?

How should there ever be a poem with a gender language in which people appear?

Should novels look like they are interspersed with passwords with special characters?

Lullabies and poems performed with gender breaks?

Why are people allowed to have so much influence without any sense of language?

That must not be successful!

Self-care: everyone wants to be addressed!

The most common argument that gender advocates say to me: “There are people who feel hurt when they feel left out.

I want to address everyone! ”Apart from the fact that naming women, the others are in turn excluded even more (see above, ice skaters), this argument is interesting.

Why does everyone want to be addressed?

Does everyone always have to be addressed personally?

Why the hell?

Do women want to feel addressed as fraudsters, child molesters and egoists?

Isn't it enough if we feel addressed when we are addressed?

But that, ladies and gentlemen, was normal even before gender language, we don't need this censorship for that.

Gender language also promotes the increasing egocentrism in our society, in which almost everyone now sees themselves as a victim who deserves special attention.

Long live mindfulness for myself!

Help, the seeds fall on sodden ground!

Incidentally, at this moment the implanted language reform begins to develop its own dynamic.

Schwuppdiwupp turns gender language into a weapon in the hands of bureaucrats, self-care extremists and other unfree spirits.

Suddenly the conventional usage of language is frowned upon, and one is quickly Nazi or misogynist.

It is shocking how anti-liberal the debate is.

display

How much longer can a politician afford to just talk about voters?

Will a publisher still print a book in the future that does not use gender-inclusive language?

Perhaps non-gendered literature is preferred to be avoided in school or republished with gender language.

Ouch!

And already we have actually destroyed one of the most beautiful languages ​​in the world and with it freedom and attitude to life.

And the gendered trot through the streets waving the equality flag.

To this I say: worst double standards.

What else could come?

The development could continue: What about the design?

It would be only logical to use equal proportions of blue and pink tones in every design - or to replace them with a neutral gray.

At least in public space and at ARD and ZDF you should lead by example.

The first projects are already under way at the universities: A student has examined the card game in a “scientific paper”: Here the king stands above the queen.

The student was able to change that successfully.

You can imagine what your gender-sensitive Skat sheet looks like.

Source: Rieke Hümpel

Rieke Hümpel is a qualified biologist, trained newspaper and textbook editor and runs the advertising agency Oben.