He Said, She Said.

Posted By Cliff Tuttle | August 2, 2009

Posted by Cliff Tuttle (c) 2009

I am not the only writer who is having problems accommodating the rapid change in the role of the sexes. In my law school graduating class of 1973 (deep in the last century) there were only a handful of women. Today, law school classes everywhere are about equally divided. The profession as a whole has already reflected that change. Exactly half of the judges in Philadelphia are members of the fair sex. (Are we still allowed to say that?)

So, it is with considerable justification that many writers are dropping the word “he” as the default designation for an unnamed lawyer or other role that was once primarily a male preserve. When a writer wants to refer to some lawyer, any lawyer, in the third person, she may decide to use the feminine version of the adverb, at least some of the time.

But which “some of the time”?

Am I the only male who worries that I may be perceived as making a sexist comment if I use “she” in a context that may be stereotypical or derogatory?

“Every practitioner must be concerned about whether she is dividing her time properly between work and family.”

“Maybe nobody has ever told her that she is an insufferable bore.”

Now try those sentences with the traditional “he/she” designation we sometimes like to use:

“Every practitioner must be concerned about whether he or she is dividing his or her time properly between work and family.”

“Maybe nobody has ever told him or her that he or she is an insufferable bore.”

Pretty awkward, huh? Now try the non-specific “they” that is a common place-holder, with the grammar corrected:

“Practitioners must be concerned about whether they are dividing their time properly between work and family.”

“Maybe nobody has ever told them that they are insufferable bores.”

Well, kind of, but not quite the same. People don’t make work-family decisions as a group. Being boring is not usually a group activity — although I can think of several exceptions. Using the plural when you mean the singular is sometimes satisfactory and sometimes not. Usually, we rewrite the sentence to eliminate the problem.

But we shouldn’t have to do this. We need, by common consent, to develop a third person singular pronoun (other than the neuter “it” that could stand for both he or she, as well as his or hers. One legal blogger I read this morning (a female) seems to have resolved the matter by using “she” all of the time. That is one solution, but I don’t like it. Reverse discrimination.

I have seen a few tentative uses of the word “s/he”. You might need a footnote for a while to explain the meaning, which is “he or she”, or more correctly, “she or he”. Will this work? Can you say the following phrase with a straight face?

“S/he said, s/he said.”

Now, what about “his” and hers”? “Hirs”?

Then there’s “him”/”her” and “himself/herself” to truncate. Any ideas?

Oh, well. Maybe I’ll try “s/he” out occasionally, together with an asterisk. After all, if somebody doesn’t like it, what can s/he* do about it?

CLT

*he or she

Welcome

CLIFF TUTTLE has been a Pennsylvania lawyer for over 45 years and (inter alia) is a real estate litigator and legal writer. The posts in this blog are intended to provide general information about legal topics of interest to lawyers and consumers with a Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania focus. However, this information does not constitute legal advice and there is no lawyer-client relationship created when you read this blog. You are encouraged to leave comments but be aware that posted comments can be read by others. If you wish to contact me in privacy, please use the Contact Form located immediately below this message. I will reply promptly and in strict confidence.

Subscribe to our feed