Misgendering in English language contexts: Applying non-cisgenderist methods to feminist research

TLDR

The APA Publication Manual warns against generic masculine language, which misgenders people by assigning them a gender they may not identify with, a form of cisgenderism that disproportionately affects trans individuals. The study explores how adopting non‑cisgenderist research methods can reduce misgendering and benefit feminist research. The authors examined four high‑impact English sexist‑language studies, applied a cisgenderism framework to expose their reliance on masculine generics, and highlighted overlooked misgendering experiences.

Abstract

The American Psychological Association (APA) Publication Manual (2010) cautions authors against generic masculine language, which uses 'he' and 'man' for all people. This misgendering designates people as members of a gender category with which they do not identify. Misgendering may occur to anyone, but is a particularly common experience of people typically labelled as 'trans'. Misgendering is a form of cisgenderism, the discriminatory ideology that delegitimises people's own designations of their bodies and genders. We analysed four empirical papers with the highest current impact factors in English sexist language research: Moulton, Robinson, and Elias (1978); Hyde (1984); Gastil (1990); and Gannon, Luchetta, Rhodes, Pardie, and Segrist (1992). We applied a cisgenderism framework to identify limitations of defining sexist language chiefly as masculine generics. We then discuss actual experiences of misgendering that current sexist language research overlooks. We explore how the adoption of non-cisgenderist research methods can reduce misgendering and benefit Feminist research.