Gender neutrality is important when writing about people because it is more accurate — not to mention respectful — and is consistent with the values of equality recognized, for example, in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is also professionally responsible and is mandated by the Federal Plan for Gender Equality, which was approved by the Cabinet and presented to the Fourth United Nations World Conference on Women in 1995.
The need to deal equally with men and women highlights the desirability of drafting using gender-neutral language. Laws that exclude references to the female gender do not promote gender equality. For this reason, gender-specific language should not be used in legislation. Gender-specific words should be replaced with gender-neutral words that have the same meaning. In addition, the following writing techniques should be considered to avoid using a gender-specific pronoun:
In the past, the masculine pronoun was commonly used in the English language to signify the non-specific "he or she". The Interpretation Act provides that references to female persons include male persons and vice versa. Subsection 33(1) reads:
33. (1) Words importing female persons include male persons and corporations and words importing male persons include female persons and corporations.
It is now generally well-accepted that gender-specific language should only be used for references to persons of one gender or the other, for example in provisions that deal with women taking maternity leave. In all other cases, it should be avoided.
There are a number of ways to avoid using gender-specific language. Many gender-specific terms may be replaced with gender-neutral terms that have the same meaning. Of course, current drafting practices already require that drafters select gender-neutral terms over gender-specific terms. For example:
| Avoid | Use |
|---|---|
| chairman | chairperson ("chair" is rarely used in federal Statutes) |
| fireman | firefighter |
| policeman | police officer |
| businessman | business executive/entrepreneur/business person |
| workman | worker |
| foreman | supervisor |
| cameraman | camera operator |
| mailman | letter carrier |
| waiter / waitress | server |
| stewardess | flight attendant |
| fisherman | fisher |
Note that the pronoun(s) that follow may also need to be changed when any of the above suggestions are used.
There are also a number of writing techniques that may be used to avoid gender-specific pronouns. The technique that will be most appropriate in a particular case will depend on the sentence. What is effective in one situation may not be useful in another. For this reason, the options below have not been listed in any order of preference.
When drafting amendments that would otherwise leave gender-specific language in an amended Act or regulation, it should be recommended to the client that the entire amended Act or regulation be made gender neutral.
However, in Acts other factors may come into play. For example, it may take more time to draft the amendments, they may substantially lengthen the amending Act or the provisions to be amended may involve additional contentious issues that would not otherwise be raised. To deal with this, consider amending particular words instead of whole provisions. For example,
X. The English version of the Act is amended by replacing the word "his" with the word "their" in the following provisions:
(a) …
As concerns regulations, similar factors may come into play. In addition, amendments that are being made solely for the purpose of achieving gender neutrality may also involve questions of whether there is statutory authority for the provisions that are to be amended. Addressing issues of regulation-making authority will take extra time and may necessitate the preparation of a written legal opinion. As with Acts, pinpoint amendments to a number of regulatory provisions can be made using a single amending clause. The technique is substantially the same as that used for:
X. The English version of the Regulations is amended by replacing the word "his" with the word "their" in the following provisions:
(a)…
However, before using this technique, the drafter must carefully review each of the relevant provisions to ensure that the substitution is appropriate throughout the legislation. If a gender-specific reference has been used in various provisions for a particular reason, a single amending clause would not be effective. One example of this is the definition of "war" in subsection 2(1) of the Merchant Navy Veteran and Civilian War-related Benefits Act, R.S., 1985, c. C-31. It reads as follows:
"War" means the war waged by His Majesty's Allies against Germany and Germany's Allies, which for the purposes of this Act shall be deemed to have commenced on September 1, 1939 and to have terminated on April 1, 1947.
Another obvious example in which a single amending clause would be inappropriate is where an Act or regulation contains some provisions that have been enacted using gender-specific language, while others that have been enacted at a later date contain gender-neutral language. This technique would not be useful in such cases since the result would be that references to "his or her" would become references to "their or her".
Arthur Close, "Gender-Free Legal Writing"
, British Columbia Law Institute (03/09/99), http://www.bcli.org/pages/projects/genderfree/genderfree.html.
Robert D. Eagleson, "A Singular Use of 'They' "
, (1994-95) The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing 87.
Rosalie Maggio, The Nonsexist Word Finder: A Dictionary of Gender-Free Usage (New York: ORYX Press, 1987).
Mary Jane Mossman, "Use of Non-Discriminatory Language in Law"
(1995) International Legal Practitioner 1.