Sex Bias In Writing

[Alan Petersen]

Hello there,

I was wondering how important is it to write in gender neutral terms when writing sales copy? I'll use a famous headline as an example:

"THE LAZY MAN'S WAY TO RICHES" which was written in the early 70's. In today's world wouldn't it be best to write "THE LAZY PERSON'S WAY TO RICHES"?

How PC do we need to be in our copywriting to not alienate perspective customers? I'm not concerned about grammatical correctness but political correctness of using gender terminology that might be seen as biased.

Your feedback is appreciated!

Alan

[icjackson]

I do it when I know the audience will care, and when writing in a formal style.

I restrict my useage to those circumstances because gender sensitivity in writing can be tedious and it can interrupt the flow of the work.

I hate having to jump through all of the grammatical hoops involved with acknowledging both sexes. Any time I use a pronoun I have to say, "he or she", "him or her", or "himself or herself" - if the tone of a piece is conversational, that can get really annoying really quickly.

However, on the contrary, if a work is more formal, it usually doesn't pose such a burden. It just depends...


I'm a woman, and I am not offended by titles like "The Lazy Man's Way To Riches". However, if the book poses a gender bias in it's message, that can be annoying. Gender generic language in and of itself really isn't offensive to most women. It's gender bias in the message that most often causes a stir.

[Steven Wagenheim]

Alan, that's a very good point that you brought up especially referring to
that headline.

Today, I think you do need to be gender neutral.

Now, having said that, if your product is targeted to a male audience, like
baldness, then yes, you DO use the headline...

"Men...Want Your Hair Back In 7 Days...Guaranteed?"

Yes, I know, women can go bald, but this is mostly a men's problem.

If you're targeting men, speak to me. If you're targeting women, speak to
women. If it's neutral, speak to both.

[Kyle Tully]

Originally Posted by Alan Petersen

"THE LAZY MAN'S WAY TO RICHES" which was written in the early 70's. In today's world wouldn't it be best to write "THE LAZY PERSON'S WAY TO RICHES"?

Look at the market for that type of product... I bet "Man's" would out-pull "Person's".

Write to your core target audience. Being "neutral" attracts no one.

[Alan Petersen]

Originally Posted by Kyle Tully

Look at the market for that type of product... I bet "Man's" would out-pull "Person's".

Write to your core target audience. Being "neutral" attracts no one.

Exactly. If my target audience is men and women using gender neutral verbiage is best then using sexist writing. I like Steve's tip:

If you're targeting men, speak to men. If you're targeting women, speak to
women. If it's neutral, speak to both.

The consensus from several professional writers is to use culture-and-gender-neutral language. It's not about being "neutral" it's about reaching out to your target audience when it includes men and women. At the very least a concept worth testing to see which one pulls better. But for now if my target is men and women I would use "person" over "man".

[John Rowe]

Originally Posted by Alan Petersen

"THE LAZY MAN'S WAY TO RICHES" which was written in the early 70's.

THE LAZY WOMAN'S WAY TO RICHES...
Would get more attention today, from both genders!

Think about it.

[Omar Khafagy]

Alan, here's my take...

I'm gonna assume that your objective in all of this is to earn money. You do this by speaking to your reader.

You find out how much your reader is listening by testing both headlines and figuring out which one sells more.

Then, you know your answer.

Consider this too: what about fields where there IS no gender neutral word that's easily read/known.

For example "Become an Actor in 10 Easy Steps!"

You COULD say "Become an Actress in 10 Easy Steps!" (and in some markets that might be more effective)

But the only gender neutral alternative I can think of is "Thespian". Would you ever stick Thespian in there instead?

Your best bet is to just test it out =)

[Loren Woirhaye]

It's interesting that you cite Joe Karbo's book. It was widely
advertised in magazines for years... mostly journals with
a predominantly male readership.

It's a wild generalization to say that men seek investment/sales opportunities
while women are more likely to seek work-at-home jobs, not
investment opportunities or complex schemes. You can check
this at the WAHM.com site where on a daily basis women inquire
about ways to make money from home with no investment - the
work from home J.O.B.

I have a theory about this. Men are often frustrated with the
earning possibilities of their skills in their local economies so
they look for opportunities to make money in other ways.
Almost by definition the guy has to be in a career path that
isn't satisfying.

Women with young children tend to be considerably more
risk-averse and more interested in finding ways to get paid
while their kids are occupied by working at home.

These generalizations are just that. In my experience as
a man selling business opportunities the people who move
forward are overwhelmingly men. I try to write for women
too, and women like my stuff... but probably 85% of my
subscribers seem to be men... and that's more or less reflected
in 85% of the buyers being men as well.

[Alan Petersen]

Originally Posted by John Rowe

THE LAZY WOMAN'S WAY TO RICHES...
Would get more attention today, from both genders!

Think about it.

True that! Now that's outside the box thinking.

[Alexa Smith]

I think people are more or less used to "he" meaning "he or she" and so on. It can be worse to be clumsily "politically correct" than just to write naturally.

I suppose "person" isn't going to offend anyone instead of "man". But repeatedly saying "he or she" all the time, or using "they"/"them"/"their" following a singular, which is just bad grammar, or putting "s/he" as some people do are all a bit unnecessary, IMHO.

[icjackson]

I find it interesting that the two women who replied to this thread are the only ones who have said it's not that big a deal.

Apparently, the feminist movement (I'm not commenting on whether it is good or bad) has created a strong sensitivity to gender neutrality in media...with those who are most likely to be accused of being insensitive.

If it goes against the natural flow, please don't do it. Bad writing or writing that is unappealing to the reader is a much worse offense than not acknowledging both sexes at every turn.