2

Reflect Reality

ONYX STEPPED OUT the front door with four-year-old Jake and his mom, Tomoko. “Thanks so much, Onyx!” Tomoko said brightly. “We’ll see you tomorrow.”

“Bye, Jake,” Onyx said, crouching down to his eye level. “It’s so fun to be your nanny. I’m glad your mom found me.” Tomoko smiled at them both.

Daniel, Jake’s dad, was walking up the front path. He waved hello and goodbye at once. “Hey, Gigi,” he said. “See ya soon!” He turned to Jake and asked, “Did you have fun with her today?”

Onyx winced a little, then walked away. As they moved down the path, they realized their heart was racing.

It had been almost a month since Onyx had explained to Daniel and Tomoko that they were nonbinary. That they weren’t using the name Gigi anymore, and instead would now be called Onyx. That their pronouns weren’t she/her but actually they/them.

But Daniel kept on using their birth name and the wrong pronouns. And especially since he was their employer and being out as nonbinary was so new, Onyx didn’t quite know how to correct him. But having their requests ignored and treated like they didn’t matter—it felt terrible.

Onyx was surprised by just how strong their body’s response was to being deadnamed and misgendered. It felt like a punch to the stomach, a shock to the system. A nonbinary friend had recently said that when people used she instead of they for them, “it feels like a thousand bees are stabbing me in the chest. It hurts.” Onyx was starting to understand what they meant.

Later that evening, Tomoko gave Onyx a call.

“I’m so sorry that Daniel keeps deadnaming you. And using the wrong pronouns. I keep on explaining, but he just doesn’t seem to get it. He talks about how feminine you look, and how being nonbinary seems like just a phase that younger people go through to get attention. I’m so frustrated.”

Onyx didn’t know what to say, so they sat in awkward silence.

Tomoko went on. “Daniel’s usually such a nice guy. I don’t know why he’s okay with being so rude about this. I told him that if you quit because he can’t be polite enough to use your correct name and pronouns, then he’s going to be the one staying home from work to take care of Jake until we can find someone new. Really, I’m so sorry.”

Onyx loved Jake, but if his house wasn’t going to be a safe place, they’d have to look for other work. It would be sad to leave him behind, but how much discomfort and disrespect were they supposed to put up with?

• • •

Scenes like this one are happening way more frequently in the 2020s than they used to, even just a decade ago. We’re having discussions about gender identity, pronouns, and new names that many of us never expected—and aren’t really prepared for.

Is it that there is a new reality? That suddenly there are more genders than male or female? That young people are declaring that they’re nonbinary because it’s trendy?

In fact, the scientific reality of biology and gender hasn’t changed; it’s just that our social reality is finally catching up with the science and with people’s lived experiences. And now that we are moving to be in greater harmony with reality, we are using language in some new ways so we can do a better job of reflecting the world around us.

PRONOUNS AND GENDER

Pronouns may seem small, innocuous, and even dull. But they’re absolutely central to inclusive language. That’s because gender plays a major role in English when we are being polite, showing respect, and talking about people appropriately and accurately.

When I went to high school and then college in the 1980s, gender was widely assumed to be based in biology and have just two categories. There were female people, there were male people, and that was it. It was understood that everyone fit in one of those two categories and that nature decided which category you belonged in. This is called the gender binary.

We knew that a small number of people had “sex change” operations and “switched genders.” These people still fit into the binary and were now considered “the opposite sex.” (We no longer say “sex change operation,” and now say “gender-affirming surgery” and “gender-affirming care.”)

The semantic frame for “the opposite sex” shows us how gender was seen as an all-or-nothing binary. In that frame, male and female are seen as opposite. As if gender was a coin, with one side female and one side male—it’s either heads or tails, one or the other.

We also knew that some people would wear clothes associated with “the opposite sex.” They might be labeled “transvestites” (or the very derogatory “trannies”) or “cross-dressers,” and were seen as socially marginal—the flavor of these words out in the general culture wasn’t positive. Note that “trannies” in particular is a word to be avoided (unless you’re in-group and doing reclaiming work).

Many cultures have known for a long time that gender is not a binary and have terminology that reflects that. This includes First Nations members and Native Americans, South Asians, Tongans, other Pacific Islanders, and many more.¹ Terms like Cree aayahkwew, Inuktitut sipiniq, Kanien’keha onón:wat, Hindi hijra, Malagasay sekrata, Tongan fakaleiti, and Hawai’ian māhū show us that nonbinary people have long been recognized around the world.²

Now, in the 2020s, many English speakers are just coming to a new acceptance of this age-old reality. In order to be polite in today’s world, it’s important to use pronouns that reflect reality—along with gender terminology that is accurate and respectful.

New Etiquette

There is a newly widespread standard when it comes to pronouns. I live in the Bay Area and have a lot of clients in tech. Both areas are at the forefront of this new etiquette. But I see it advancing at different rates elsewhere—and age, location, and community seem to play a big role in how quickly this new etiquette is adopted.

For example, in 2019, I was back in New York and emailed a high school friend from my work account. When she picked me up at the train station she laughed and said, “What’s up with the pronouns in your email sig? Suzanne Wertheim (she/her)? You’re so Californian now. We don’t do that here.” (But I should note that there are plenty of people in many US states who have been presenting their pronouns for years.)

And in 2021, I rented an Airbnb in the Sierra foothills for a weeklong retreat to outline this book. My host said, “What’s the book about?” After I explained a few of the things I’d be covering, she said, “Pronouns? Oh, like calling people they and stuff? I’m too old for that.” She shook her head. “I’m not going to learn it.”

By contrast, the new etiquette is absolutely normal and standard for many people who were born in the ’90s and later, especially children. It was unremarkable to my friend’s six-year-old when before a playdate he mentioned both his friend’s food allergies and pronouns—no nuts, and please use they/them.

What can you do if, like me, you were raised in a time and place that gave you an inaccurate understanding of gender, and some now-outdated grammatical rules on how to use they? Because you’re going to face some real challenges adapting to the new rules.

The first step is unpacking the gender binary and understanding how this incredibly pervasive concept can be an obstacle to accurate and inclusive language.

Beyond the Gender Binary

The gender binary shows up in all kinds of ways in the English-speaking world. Gender is what we call a salient aspect of someone’s identity. It’s notable, and it’s something we talk about explicitly. People pay attention to it, and they alter their behavior depending on what gender category they think someone fits into.

Our ideas about gender extend way beyond a person’s body or appearance. Here’s a quick experiment.

It wasn’t hard, was it? Even if you might disagree with the answer (“But I’m a woman and I love scotch!”), you know what the cultural expectations are. A friend of mine is a meat eater and her husband is vegetarian, and at restaurants they almost always put her steak in front of him. Another straight couple I know finds that her whiskey gets handed to him, while his sugary cocktail (lately he likes strawberry daiquiris) is placed in front of her.

Think about your answers. Which of them would you say is “higher prestige” and which is “lower prestige”? Which is seen as something anyone might enjoy? And which feels limited to only some people, or like someone might get made fun of for enjoying it?

After reflection, I suspect that you can see that gender is not just a pervasive category that gets applied to all kinds of things. It’s also that things associated with men and masculinity are seen as either universal or higher prestige—or both. This can create other challenges when it comes to inclusive language and will show up again in later chapters.

If you’ve been trained since infancy that gender is both binary and a major factor in deciding what you wear, eat, watch, drive, and so much more, it can be challenging to shift your mental models so they reflect reality. (This training really does start in infancy. People will say different things to babies they see as male and babies they see as female. Babies seen as boys are told how strong and smart they are. And babies seen as girls are told how pretty and nice they are.)

I recently came across a small ad at the bottom of a website. It reads “15 Fresh Non-binary Haircuts for Women in 2022.” When I clicked through on the ad, I landed on shorthairmodels.com, where I found the same headline. This ad feels like a great representative of this transitioning moment. On the one hand, it recognizes that nonbinary people exist. On the other hand, it doesn’t apply the concept of nonbinary to the people who might want the haircut. Are nonbinary haircuts meant for women? Or are they for nonbinary people? In this very brief text, old categories clash with new ones. It’s like Daniel being able to say that his nanny is nonbinary but still calling them her.

So, if inclusive language accurately reflects reality, what are the realities of gender you should keep in mind so you can be polite and respectful?

A useful starting point is to separate out gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation.

• • •

Your gender identity is internal. It is how you see yourself, how you feel about yourself, how you would describe yourself.

Gender identity might be aligned with biology. But it also might not be. And if you grew up with the kind of limited information I did, the biology involved might be more complicated than you think.

For example, a single person can have both male and female anatomical features. Or they can have both male and female chromosomes—they might be XXY or have some cells that are XX and other cells that are XY. Or they might have hormonal characteristics that don’t “match” their anatomy, like androgen insensitivity. The most common term we use for people with biological characteristics of more than one sex is intersex.

Taking into account all the different biological variations, it’s estimated that 1.7 percent of the population is intersex in some way.³

When babies are born visibly intersex, doctors often decide for them at birth what their sex will be. These babies may even be forced to undergo surgery as infants to align their anatomy with the sex that has been decided for them.

But biological sex and gender identity are not the same thing. And while they are sometimes in alignment, they are sometimes not in alignment. Those doctors assigning sex at birth in a way that promotes a single gender identity are sometimes correct and sometimes incorrect.

When people are discussing gender, you will see phrases like assigned female at birth, often shortened to AFAB, and assigned male at birth, often shortened to AMAB.

If you were assigned female at birth and your gender identity is female, you are considered cisgender. And if you were assigned male at birth and your gender identity is male, you are also considered cisgender. In other words, the prefix cis gets added to the word gender for people whose birth sex and gender identity are aligned.

So, what about people whose birth sex and gender identity are not aligned? The most common terms used here are nonbinary and transgender. Nonbinary currently points to a range of gender identities. A nonbinary person might feel like they have both male and female characteristics or like they are a gender that is neither male nor female. Some nonbinary people are gender fluid, and their gender identity shifts over time—this could be a day or a week or longer. For example, I’ve done some work with Aaron, who is gender fluid. Some days Aaron shows up at work wearing “men’s clothes” and uses the pronouns he/him. Other days, Aaron shows up at work wearing “women’s clothes” and uses the pronouns she/her. Aaron’s colleagues have learned to ask about pronouns or to take their cues from the indexicality of Aaron’s clothes—for example, they’ll go with she and her on days when Aaron is wearing a dress and lipstick.

Some people who don’t fit in a gender binary are transgender. Some transgender people feel like they were born in the “wrong body” and transition fully into a different gender. So, a person assigned female at birth may have a male gender identity and want to be seen and thought of as a man. (You are likely to see the term trans man to describe people in this category. But this is language that evolves quickly and there may be new terms that have become more popular by the time you read this book.)

Other transgender people don’t have a gender identity that matches the sex they were assigned at birth but don’t want to fully transition into a different gender. Not all trans people want to “pass”—in other words, be perceived as straightforwardly male or female.

You’ll also find terms like agender, for people who don’t see themselves as having a particular gender, and genderqueer, an umbrella term for people who don’t subscribe to or fit in the conventional gender binary. If you’re new to thinking about gender identity, the number of terms out there may feel overwhelming. But it looks like this number is only going to grow as people find themselves in community and get to define and describe themselves in more nuanced and specific ways.

The best way to be inclusive is to mirror someone’s term for their gender identity. If they call themselves transgender, call them transgender. If they say they’re nonbinary, refer to them as nonbinary. And if they say they’re genderfluid and ask to be called he one week and she the next, then call them he or she as requested.

• • •

Gender identity is internal. It is a self-definition and a self-description.

Gender expression is external. And it is all about indexicality, pointing to cultural meaning. Your gender expression or gender presentation is how you show up in the world and the signals you give people around your gender. What you wear on your body and your face, how you style your hair, how you carry yourself, how you act.

Earlier in this chapter, you were probably able to easily name masculine and feminine food, drinks, colors, hobbies, and movies.

Well, now you can think about conventionally masculine and feminine hairstyles, makeup, clothes, colors, and fabrics. For example, a conventionally feminine person might have long hair, visible makeup, and wear a pink silk dress—in my culture, none of these choices are seen as conventionally masculine.

Your gender expression may or may not be aligned with your gender identity. And it may or may not be aligned with the sex you were assigned at birth.

In the story I opened with, Daniel makes the mistake of confusing gender expression with gender identity. His nanny, Onyx, currently has a feminine gender expression. They look female to his eyes, and they also look feminine. So he assumes that their gender identity is also female.

But just because a person looks a certain way, it doesn’t mean you know their gender. Because gender is so salient, is marked as so important by so many people, we are always scanning for and making assessments about people’s gender.

But until someone has told you their internal gender identity, you’re just guessing based on external clues—that is, based on their gender expression. And so there is always the chance that you are misgendering someone. And misgendering can be really painful.

In July of 2022, A. C. Folkes posted on LinkedIn about a recent upsetting experience at his doctor’s office.⁴ When scheduling his appointment, he told them that he is transgender, that his pronouns are he/him, and that his chosen name is different from his birth name on file. But when he showed up for his appointment, he was consistently called “ma’am” and misgendered. He writes, “It happened over and over again. And each time was a fresh wound.” His post ends with a plea to do better, because he would “like to not avoid the healthcare system for fear of emotional harm.”

So in order to be inclusive, don’t assume you know someone’s gender identity. Learning someone’s pronouns will help you be polite with them. In Chapter 3, we’ll go over other ways to be polite and avoid misgendering people.

• • •

Sexual orientation is sometimes confused with gender identity and gender expression. But you can’t assume you know who someone is attracted to—or if they’re attracted to anyone at all—just by knowing their gender identity or looking at their gender expression.

Some people are asexual or aromantic. This means they’re not sexually attracted to people or not interested in romantic relationships.

When people are attracted to only one other gender, they may be heterosexual, lesbian, or gay. Terminology around sexuality can change pretty rapidly, so some people may find these terms outdated and use other terms for themselves, like queer or dyke.

When someone is attracted to male and female people, they are bisexual. While some people use bisexual in ways that go beyond the gender binary, other people with a similar sexual orientation prefer the term pansexual, which highlights that their partners may be nonbinary, transgender, or otherwise genderqueer.

Sexual orientation, declared or assumed, does not determine pronouns or gender. Marc, a client who is gay, told me about a time he was at a meeting that was otherwise all women, and how offended he was when they said, “Since it’s just us girls here . . . ” His gender identity is male, and even though the misgendering was meant in a joking way, pointing out that he was a member of the LGBTQ+ community, it still landed really badly. Marc was still angry telling me about it months later.

I think part of the issue comes from the acronym LGBTQ+, which can be a bit confusing for some people. This acronym is used to describe a community of people who are all members of underrepresented or marginalized groups. What can be confusing to some is that the letters point to different kinds of identities. The LGB—Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual—point to sexual orientation. The T—Transgender—points to gender identity. And the Q—for Queer—can point to sexual orientation, gender identity, and more. There are new letters that sometimes appear after the Q, including I for Intersex (biology) and A for Asexual (sexual orientation) or Agender (gender identity). And the + stands for all kinds of other identities, including letters that will probably be added to the acronym in the future.

With pointers to gender identity, sexual orientation, and biology in one acronym, it makes sense that some people can lose track of what kind of identity is relevant in the moment.

To sum up:

• There are more than two genders, and not everyone can be referred to as either she or he.

• You can’t assume you know someone’s gender identity based on their gender expression.

• You can’t assume what pronouns to use based on someone’s gender expression—it is such a nuanced and personal decision that you’ll need to be told. (But you can also ask respectfully, in a private setting, in a way that doesn’t force someone to share.)

Why Are “New” Pronouns Challenging?

Using only she or he to refer to a single person doesn’t reflect the reality that many people are not definitively female or male. It erases people who are nonbinary or who have other gender identities.

Throughout the years, a small number of English pronouns have been created to reflect these other gender identities. For example, you might encounter people who request that they be referred to as ze/zir, or xe/xem, or fae/faer.⁵ But currently, the pronoun that’s most popular is one that’s been around for a long time: it’s called the singular they.

To be inclusive, you need to use the pronouns that accurately reflect a person’s reality. This can mean using they for anyone who says it’s their pronoun—even if to you, they look clearly male or clearly female. Again, just looking at someone isn’t enough to know the reality of their gender identity.

On the one hand, you already know how to use they for a single person. For example, you might write a sentence like, “Somebody left their sweatshirt in the breakroom. They need to pick it up by the end of the day.”

On the other hand, this use is for a nonspecific person. And chances are good that you haven’t had much practice using singular they for a specific person. So, becoming fluent in this new usage can be difficult.

• • •

Stacy was sitting next to me at a brunch for anti-bias folks. She turned to me and said, “Can I ask you about pronouns?” “Of course!” I said, always happy to nerd out and share some linguistic knowledge.

“Well, you remember Ali at the conference a few weeks ago, right? I was so impressed by her, I mean them. So taken by the things they said. So I’ve been talking about her a lot. But I’m having the hardest time using the right pronouns. I try to say they, my brain knows it’s they, but my tongue is at a different speed or something. And I’m so frustrated! Can you tell me what’s going on?”

I could tell her. And by the time I was done explaining what was happening in her head, the whole table was listening. Someone said, “You two should turn that into a workshop.” And we did.

• • •

Here’s what I told Stacy. Switching from she or he to they involves some real cognitive challenges. That’s because pronouns are what we call “grammar words.” And you store and access grammar words differently in your brain from other words, such as regular nouns (like bird), verbs (like fly), and adjectives (like small). What’s more, the rules for grammar words in your first language got pretty much fixed in place around puberty.

This means that using they to refer to a specific person comes up against the weight of all the literally millions of times you have used she or he. And it comes up against the unspoken grammatical rule in your brain that a single known person is referred to using she or he.

So, chances are excellent that you will make mistakes as you start to refer to a specific person using they. Because it takes time to acquire and become fluent in new grammatical rules. Instead of saying, “Oh yeah, they texted me yesterday,” you’re likely to say, “Oh yeah, she texted me yesterday.” When this happens, the best thing to do is quickly correct yourself and move on.

This is just a basic introduction to pronouns like they. If you want to dive deeper, I highly recommend reading articles by Kirby Conrod, a linguist who specializes in clear explanations of language, gender, and pronouns.⁶

Present Your Own Pronouns

Jen and I were catching up on the phone. She was biking home from Jonathan’s house, where they had just had lunch. They are both in their early fifties. “Oh, you might have an answer for this,” she yelled. (Jen seems to always be biking by a fire engine or a honking horn when she calls me on the phone.)

“Jonathan had a meeting with a new lawyers group the other day, and there were a lot of younger people there. He said there was a new protocol, and now they give their pronouns at the top of the meeting. And he was complaining to me about how irritating it is. He said, ‘I mean, I don’t announce at the start of a meeting what my religion is, or where my grandparents came from. It’s so personal and invasive and also it feels so silly.’ So, Suzanne, do you have an opinion?”

Do I have an opinion about pronouns and inclusive language? Please.

Being inclusive, and being polite, means using the pronouns she, he, and they appropriately. (And don’t forget that you might be asked to use pronouns like xe, ze, or fae with someone.) How can you learn which of these pronouns is the correct one to use with someone? And how can you also avoid forcing people to “out” themselves?

One great way to make everybody feel seen and included is to make it standard to present your English pronouns.

If only “unusual” people talk about their pronouns, then talking about pronouns acquires the flavor of being “weird.”

I’ve heard from many people who use the pronouns they/them that it can feel really awkward and uncomfortable to be the only one talking about it. It can be especially uncomfortable to be the one starting a conversation. The subtle message is that they are “different,” and that “normal” people don’t have to talk about pronouns.

So it’s helpful to have the conversation on pronouns already started, so people can jump in if they want to and make sure their identity is recognized. It’s also inclusive to normalize presenting your pronouns so it becomes the standard. If everyone is presenting their pronouns up front, it can make it a lot easier for people to jump in with their “unusual” requests. The flavor of presenting your pronouns then becomes “normal,” and it’s expected that people will be choosing from a variety of options.

You don’t want to force someone to join the conversation if they don’t want to. So you shouldn’t ask someone you’ve just met, especially in a public space, “Hey, what are your pronouns?” This puts them on the spot, and they may not feel ready to tell you. Or they may not feel that it’s safe to tell you. As I write this, it’s still legal to discriminate against LGBTQ+ people in the majority of American states and the majority of countries in the world. And transgender people who want to “pass” may feel like they’re being singled out and unsafe.

However, some people appreciate being asked respectfully in a private setting. You might say something like, “I don’t know your pronouns yet, and I’d like to use the correct ones if you’re willing to share. But it’s okay if you don’t want to.”

(Note that there are some kinds of gatherings and organizations where it’s pretty much expected that everyone can be asked about and will present their pronouns. Context is everything! The pronoun etiquette at a genderqueer meetup in Portland, Oregon, is probably pretty different from a financial services networking event at a large national conference.)

You also don’t want to use the phrase preferred pronouns. This implies that someone’s gender identity is a choice, and maybe not real. Just say pronouns.

When meeting or discussing someone new, default to they and them. This means for everyone whose pronouns you don’t know—not just people who you’re assessing as maybe having “unusual” pronouns.

It’s best to also refer to someone as a person rather than a woman or a man—this can help you avoid accidentally misgendering someone. So you can say “a person like you . . . ” instead of “a man like you . . . ”

And, if you hear someone being referred to with the wrong pronoun, like he instead of they, consider stepping in and making the correction yourself. This makes things much easier for the person being misgendered and can protect them from retaliation from people who get angry at being corrected, especially when it comes to expressions of bias.

Now that we’ve gone over the basics of gender and pronouns, it’s time to look at other ways you can make sure that your language accurately reflects reality. The most effective way to inclusively reflect reality is by eliminating what I call distorting language.

WHEN LANGUAGE DISTORTS REALITY

Much of my research focuses on identifying the specific ways that language distorts reality and amplifies bias and unfairness. I have named the three foundational ways that problematic language distorts reality masking language, inflating language, and softening language. Each of these distortions favors the perspective of people with power.

Linguistic distortions affect our mental models and our decision-making. When our understanding of a particular scenario is based on distortions, then it’s hard to make good—or inclusive—decisions.

Masking Language

An American colleague reached out to a group of us who do anti-bias work. She was adding new events to the company calendar, like celebrations of Diwali, Pride, and Women’s History Month. And some employees wrote to tell her they were “uncomfortable with her candor,” and they wanted “more neutrality in the workplace.”

(Bonus analysis! The semantic frame of candor sets up a scenario in which talking about Diwali or Pride is embarrassing or shameful.)

My colleague was having difficulty figuring out how to answer them; she knew something about their comments was problematic, but she couldn’t quite articulate what.

I emailed back and shared that their masking language was making it harder for her to come up with a good answer.

Masking language is used by a dominant group to mask a social reality. People use this language to support and maintain the status quo when it benefits them.

How does it work?

Masking language sets up the dominant group and the status quo as neutral, normal, and natural. The way it always has been, and the way it should continue to be. Common phrases include:

• “We should stay neutral.”

• “We need to keep it professional.”

• “That’s just PC.”

They all signal that discussions of and actions against bias are being framed as “out of bounds” or inappropriate or unnecessary.

• • •

So what was being masked in this case? Here, the employees were using “neutrality” to hide that a supposedly neutral workplace, one where bias is never discussed, is actually inequitable, not inclusive, and unfair.

One reality being concealed is that the standard American business calendar is not neutral, but in fact Christian. AD and BC center the birth of Christ (AD is short for anno Domini, which means “Year of Our Lord,” and BC is short for Before Christ). And if you want to go to your house of worship on Sundays or Christmas, most offices automatically give those days off. But if you want to observe Diwali or Yom Kippur or Eid al-Fitr on a weekday, in most places you’ve got to use personal days.

Neutrality sets up a framework where the current state of things is just fine. But it doesn’t actually reflect social reality.

Because, in fact, things are just fine for only some of the people.

The experience of the dominant group is usually not the experience for everyone.

During the Black Lives Matter protests of 2020, I started reading about American debates on slavery. And I learned that the US House of Representatives enforced a “gag rule” from 1836 to 1844. This gag rule prevented antislavery petitions from being read or discussed; instead, they were automatically tabled.

Pro-slavery politicians argued that it wasn’t “appropriate” for the federal government to interfere with the domestic institutions of the states.

Our present-day “let’s keep things professional” or “let’s stay neutral” is just an updated gag rule, automatically tabling the discussion of the very real systemic problems that permeate our world.

Rather than claiming that it’s important to stay neutral or professional in order to shut down efforts to be more inclusive, let’s avoid masking language and instead have open discussions about bias and unfairness.

Inflating Language

Olivia looked at the married couple holding hands one table over and said to her friend, “I have no problem with people being gay. I just don’t want them to shove it in our faces.”

Jim said to his disabled report, who was asking for a few flexible hours a week so she could visit medical specialists, “I just don’t see how you can do this job with all these doctor’s appointments.” (When she checked with an employment lawyer, he told her that the number of hours a week was so small that it might not even fit the definition of disability accommodation.)

In the faculty meeting, Ming pointed out, “Actually, those course assignments won’t work. We need to take service commitments into account.” After the meeting, her chair pulled her aside. “You need to stop with these aggressive and unseemly outbursts!” he told her. “You’re just so difficult to work with.”

“Shove it in our faces” to describe public hand holding.

“Don’t see how you can do this job” to assess someone working early or late a few days a week to allow for necessary doctor visits.

“Aggressive,” “unseemly,” and “difficult” to describe a brief, fact-based disagreement.

These are all examples of what I have named inflating language. Inflating language is a linguistic distortion in which reasonable behavior is presented as problematic. Like we saw with looting vs. finding in Chapter 1, inflating language expresses a double standard—words and actions that are acceptable when produced by one person are labeled unacceptable when produced by another.

Inflating language is most often applied to women of all races and ethnicities, people who are members of underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, disabled people, autistic people, and members of the LGBTQ+ community. (And, of course, a person can be all of these things at once.)

Who is allowed to disagree with someone? To speak with authority? To be openly affectionate with their romantic partner? To ask for flexibility or accommodations?

Turns out, it’s not everybody.

For example, a customer came up to a service counter and read the name tag of the transgender clerk about to serve him. “Graciela?” he scoffed. “She/her? Please, you look more like a Ramon.” And throughout the transaction, he called her “Ramon,” and referred to her as he and him.

For Graciela, each time the customer said “Ramon” and “he” in his sneering tone, it felt like a slap in the face. But she had worked in customer service for a long time, so she kept her face smiling and her tone cool and even. “Please call me Graciela,” she asked. “And please use my correct pronouns. I would really appreciate it.”

The customer’s face grew red. “MANAGER! NOW!” he yelled. When the manager approached, the customer went on a tirade. He told the manager that Graciela was angry and aggressive. That she had verbally attacked him. That he had felt unsafe. That she should be fired.

In the customer’s inflating language, a request to use the correct name and pronouns was described as angry, aggressive, a verbal attack, and making him feel unsafe.

Luckily for Graciela, the manager was able to review the security camera footage, which included audio. So he could see that her behavior was reasonable, professional, and appropriate.

But many other people like Graciela, who are the targets of distortions and inflated language, aren’t as lucky. The people distorting their behavior are the ones who are believed. And their targets may be reprimanded, fired, or arrested for behavior that would not have been seen as problematic if it was done by someone else. Someone maybe whiter. Or maler. Someone cisgender or straight. Someone abled. Someone who is the boss and not the report. Someone who is the customer and not the service representative.

Autistic social realities are often not understood by allistic people, so it is common to find the words and actions of autistic people described using inflating language. Autistic people may be called things like “rude” or “unempathetic” or “cold” simply for acting according to autistic communicative principles. This includes giving a data-oriented answer to the question, “Do I look okay in these pants?” or showing empathy by sharing a similar story about themselves rather than asking follow-up questions.

Inflating language often means that we make inaccurate judgments and bad decisions. And punish people who haven’t done anything wrong.

Softening Language

Aisha was frustrated. Her colleague Charles was seriously creepy with her, and she dreaded coming to work. He would stare at her chest, hug her from behind, and say things like, “Mmmm, you really fill out those jeans.”

But the HR rep said, “Oh, that’s just how Charles is. You know, boys will be boys.”

Marco started writing down his teammates’ inappropriate comments. Jokes about being “ghetto” and his family speaking “broken English.” Remarks about how he was just a “token hire” so nobody expected all that much from him.

But his manager said, “Oh, they’re so young—they just don’t know any better. You should assume good intentions.”

Lisa uses her lunch breaks to walk around the block and cry. It’s mostly because of her manager, Betsy, who constantly belittles and yells at and undermines her. Other people on her team also cry on their breaks.

But the head of HR said, “Yeah, Betsy can be kind of tough. But it’s just that she has high expectations for her reports.”

Tim has been surprised at the intrusive questions coming from his colleagues. “So, what happened to you?” “How do you put your pants on if you’re in a wheelchair?” “Can you have sex?”

But the HR person he went to said, “Oh, they’re just curious. You’re the only person in a wheelchair at this company, so they just want to learn more about you.”

• Boys will be boys.

• They don’t know any better.

• Assume good intentions.

• She just has high expectations.

• They’re just curious.

These are all examples of what I call softening language. It’s a handy label for language that presents problematic behavior as appropriate and acceptable. Softening language is the reverse of inflating language.

In my research, I’ve found that softening language is generally used for people with power. Institutional power, like being an executive. Or social power, like, in the US, being white or male or abled (especially for people who are all three at once).

Softening language is used to shift the focus away from someone’s harmful impact and work to create empathy for them. To minimize or dismiss the harm they have caused.

When I hear softening language, I’m reminded of the killer rabbit in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Surrounded by the bones of people he has killed, the rabbit is underestimated as a “harmless little bunny.” Only when he kills three more people right in front of our heroes is he suddenly taken seriously.

Don’t describe the problematic people around you as harmless little bunnies.

It’s important to use accurate terminology when describing someone’s words and actions. This is a necessary part of holding people accountable. The terminology doesn’t have to be exaggerated. Just accurate.

Using the previous examples, let’s move out of softening language and shift the focus to the behavior or its impact.

• Boys will be boys. → He is engaging in sexual harassment.

• They don’t know any better. → They haven’t been held accountable.

• Assume good intentions. → Biased behavior has had a negative impact.

• She just has high expectations. → Abusive managing has demoralized the team.

• They’re just curious. → They’re asking work-inappropriate, intrusive, and demeaning questions.

Softening language disguises problematic behavior. It’s saying, “that sounds like a you problem.” It’s saying, “Bad behavior doesn’t matter—at least not when the person behaving badly is someone in a position of power.” Or it’s pretending that there isn’t a problem at all.

I have collected many examples of softening language used to minimize or invalidate someone’s experience. For example:

• “That’s just how they are.”

• “He’s just really friendly.”

• “We don’t tolerate gender bias. I’m sure he’s taking all factors into consideration.”

• “Don’t take it personally. She didn’t mean it that way.”

• “He’s actually a good guy.”

• “It’s not a big deal. I think you’re being too sensitive here.”

• “But we’ve already given you so many accommodations.”

These were comments made in response to reports of sexualized remarks, biased work allocations, toxic bullying, racist comments, ableism, and pervasive sexual harassment.

In therapeutic psychology, these kinds of statements are called invalidation and disconfirmation. In popular culture, they are called gaslighting.

Comments like these show up a lot as part of problematic parenting. Children whose experiences, problems, and emotions are consistently invalidated by their caretakers often end up with psychological damage—and engaging in self-harm.⁷

And employees whose experiences, problems, and complaints are consistently invalidated by leadership also end up damaged. In my work, I’ve found a strong correlation between invalidation and low employee morale, low psychological safety, low levels of trust, and high turnover.

Minimizing and invalidating comments tell people who have been harmed in some way that their experiences don’t matter. That their injuries don’t matter.

That they don’t matter.

And, adding insult to injury, they are often told that they should focus on their own behavior. That it is their job to do better. This shows up in comments like:

• “You should be more polite.”

• “Be the bigger person.”

• “Don’t make a big deal out of this.”

So be on the lookout for invalidating and minimizing comments. Because they protect people who are behaving badly. And they tell people who are being treated badly, “Sorry, we just don’t care.”

“Just Joking”

“ . . . and it was all thanks to the Kung Flu!” Cathy finished her story and laughed.

Mei sat up in surprise. She paused, took a deep breath, and said, “You know, Cathy? It isn’t okay to say ‘the Kung Flu.’ It’s actually pretty racist.”

Cathy frowned and crossed her arms. “Jeez, Mei, I’m just joking. There’s nothing wrong with making Kung Flu jokes. Lighten up, you know? You don’t have to be so sensitive all the time.”

Cathy was joking. But was she “just joking”?

• • •

“Just joking” is a common way people deflect criticism for something they’ve said. That something might be an expression of bias, like “the Kung Flu.” Or it might be making fun of someone’s haircut, or height, or the car they drive.

When someone like Mei points out that someone like Cathy has said something that crosses a line, that’s inappropriate in some way, “just joking” is a common defense tactic.

It suggests that because there is a humorous framing, nothing is inappropriate.

So if someone says there’s a problem, it’s actually their problem. They’re “oversensitive.” They need to “lighten up.” This logic fits right in with a common defense tactic used by people who say and do abusive or inappropriate things: DARVO.

DARVO stands for Deny, Argue, and Reverse Victim and Offender.

Here’s how it played out in Cathy’s words.

In my work with clients, I encounter DARVO responses all the time.

What’s especially interesting to me is that DARVO was originally used to describe the behavior of sexual offenders and is commonly used in discussions of psychological abusers and narcissists.

That’s right. The same tactics that show up as “just joking” and “lighten up” in defense of things like racist jokes are used by rapists and abusers to defend their actions.

Does this mean that you’re never allowed to joke? That you can’t use humor anymore? That the “PC Police” will jump down your throat if you say something edgy?

Not at all! I’m being pretty serious in this book, but I genuinely love comedy. I wrote my undergrad thesis on comedy and social commentary in Oscar Wilde’s work. After college I wrote to Ben Stiller to see how I might get a job writing for his show. (Unfortunately, by the time he got my letter, his show had been cancelled.) Before I left academia, I was researching a book on comedy in Los Angeles and going to one or more live comedy shows each week. Comedy is great. And I want people to be funny!

Please, joke away! Just make sure that your jokes don’t violate any of the Six Principles of Inclusive Language. And then you’re good to go.

Two final notes on joking.

1. When it comes to humor, be on the alert for communication clashes between autistic and allistic people. Humor that may be seen as violating a Principle of Inclusive Language for one group may be just fine for the other. The best thing to do is ask for an explanation.

2. There are different rules for in-group people making jokes among themselves. This is too complicated for me to actually cover in any depth here. But say, for example, a group of Jews want to make Holocaust jokes with each other, or some Irish people want to make potato famine jokes. I’m not going to point my finger and say it’s wrong or inappropriate. But if it wasn’t an in-group conversation, these jokes would likely violate Principle 6, Recognize pain points.