Some researchers say terms like “male,” “female,” “mother” and “father” should not be used in science because they assume that sex is binary and heterosexuality is the norm.
A group of researchers from the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (EEB) Language Project say male and female should instead be referred to as “sperm-producing” and “egg-producing,” while mother and father should be labeled as “parent,” “egg donor” and “sperm donor” in the scientific field.
The EEB Language Project, launched by “like-minded scientists” across the United States and Canada, is a grassroots effort calling for a reevaluation of some terminology used in science to make it more inclusive and precise.
“The project started as a Twitter conversation among a few people discussing potentially harmful terminology,” Dr. Kaitlyn Gaynor, University of British Columbia researcher, said in a statement. “We reached out to different networks in ecology and evolution that were focused on increasing inclusion and equity in the field to rally support for one very specific action — revising terminology that might be harmful to certain people, particularly those from groups historically and currently excluded from science.”
The EEB Language Project has identified a list of the 24 top harmful terms along with suggested alternatives, which is “meant to serve as a starting point for dialogue.”
Other terms on the list include:
•”feminized / masculinized” which “implies that feminine and masculine are biological traits rather than social constructs” and should be replaced with describing the specific traits
•”man/woman” which are “highly anthropomorphic/biases towards men or male traits” and should be replaced with “human”
•”Hermaphrodite” which is a “derogatory term used to cause harm to the intersex and trans individuals” and should be replaced with “monoecious/intersex/bi-gametic”
•”gender” which is “a social construct, often conflated with sex” and should be replaced by “sex”
•”race” which “perpetuates the idea that human race is a biological rather than social construct when used to describe non-human subspecies” and should be replaced with “population/subspecies/ecotype”
•”alien/non-native/exotic/invasive” which are “xenophobic, anti-immigrant, and militaristic” and should be replaced with “newly arrived species/non-indigenous species/introduced species/nuisance species”
•”citizen science” which is “harmful to non-citizens who are excluded by that language” and should be replaced with “participant science/community science”
The project points out that the use of harmful language isn’t usually intentional — “what is harmful to one person may not be perceived as problematic to another, and inadvertent harm can arise as a result of the inherent complexities and historical legacies of language.” It also notes that “ecology and evolutionary biology both have histories rooted in eugenics, ableism and racism — beliefs that fed into harmful practices across North America and Europe and unfortunately still influence the fields today.”
Other harmful words on the list include “Indian,” “blind/double blind,” “survival of the fittest,” “noose,” “primitive/advanced,” “virgin,” “discover/discovery,” and “slave and master.”
“While some of it’s about language, the bigger picture is looking at the conceptualization of our field,” said Haley Branch, a PhD candidate with UBC Botany. “What kinds of questions are being missed because of the narrow breadth of the field? It’s a call to broaden our understanding of the natural world and look at what kinds of questions we’ll be asking in the future.”
The project includes an online form where people can submit their suggestions for harmful words and have their voices heard.
“The EEB Language Project will be a living document, as particular words that are harmful and their alternatives can change over time,” said Dr. Danielle Ignace, a UBC researcher. “The hope is that this grassroots effort brings people together.”
* Article from: Audacy