User:OberMegaTrans/ss2023/GenderStar

Vorgeschichte

Early occurrences of addressing both genders can be found in the example of a 1478 Nuremberg police regulations, decreeing, "that no Bürger (= male citizen) or Bürgerin (= female citizen), or Gast ( = male guest) or Gästin (= female guest) of this city of Nuremberg [...] shall beg." In the 19th century, a shortened spelling within parentheses or brackets was developed for pairing personal designations, created by combining the female ending of German gendered nouns to the masculine designation. For example, Lehrer (male teacher) would be paired with the suffix (-innen), designating the plural female form of the noun, for the final writing of Lehrer(innen) to cover the plural both genders. From the 1940s on, this form was increasingly substituted by using a slash and hyphen: Lehrer/-innen. In the context of the growing feminist movements of the 1960s, the slash and hyphen form was widely adopted to make women more visible, though noun generalization still typically used the personal masculine form. (Generic masculine of “Lehrer”: all teachers).

Beginning in the late 1970s, feminist linguists developed the concept of "gender-equitable language" and appropriate ways of phrasing it to treat women equally in terms of language. This growing trend was furthered by the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women in 1979 and the Guide to Non-Sexist Language published by the United Nations in 1987.

section 2

1981 war der Vorschlag aufgekommen, den Schrägstrich mit dem nachfolgenden kleinen „i“ zum Großbuchstaben „I“ zusammenzuziehen, als „Binnen-I“ bezeichnet: LehrerInnen. Daran kritisierte in der Folge die Queer-Theorie, dass mit dem Binnen-I nur die Zweigeschlechtlichkeit betont werde, aber nichtbinäre Geschlechtsidentitäten und intergeschlechtliche Personen sprachlich ausgeschlossen blieben (vergleiche Gender).

Im Jahr 2003 wurde vorgeschlagen, die zweigeschlechtlichen Kurzformen mit Schrägstrich oder Binnen-I durch einen Unterstrich zwischen der männlichen Wortform beziehungsweise dem Wortstamm und der weiblichen Endung zu erweitern, um „einen anderen Ort von Geschlechtlichkeit“ zu öffnen: Lehrer_innen. Diese genderinkludierende Schreibweise wurde im Anschluss als Gender-Gap oder Gendergap („sprachliche Geschlechter-Lücke“) bezeichnet.

Genderstern bei „Frauen*“

In einer erweiterten Bedeutung verwendet beispielsweise die Alice Salomon Hochschule Berlin (Fachhochschule für Sozialarbeit und Sozialpädagogik) den Asterisk seit 2017: „Das Gendersternchen (*) hinter einem Wort dient als Verweis auf den Konstruktionscharakter von ‚Geschlecht‘. ‚Frauen*‘ beispielsweise bezieht sich auf alle Personen, die sich unter der Bezeichnung ‚Frau‘ definieren, definiert werden und/oder sich sichtbar gemacht sehen.“

translation:

In 1981, it was suggested to combine the slash with the following small letter 'i' to use a capital 'I' instead, named 'Binnen-I', which translates to 'within-I': LehrerInnen. It was consequently criticized by queer theoricians that this strategy highlighted the binary gender system and that nonbinary and inter people were linguistically excluded (cf. gender).

In 2003, it was suggested to add an underscore between the root and the feminine suffix to the binary forms using the 'Binnen-I' or a slash. This was intended as a space for diverse gender identities: Lehrer_innen. This gender-inclusive way of spelling was and has since been called 'Gender-Gap'.

Gender star and 'women*'

The meaning of the asterisk was extended by the university for social work Alice Salomon Hochschule Berlin in 2017. They stated that the Gender star (*) behind a work pointed to the fact that gender was a constructed category. The spelling 'Frauen*', 'women*', refered to all people self-identifiying with the term 'Frau', 'woman', being identified and/or being made visible with it.

section 3 I'm translating this section and I'll proofread the translation of section 1. - LilacMoth

Im November 2020 erklärt das Frauenreferat der Stadt Frankfurt am Main zur Einführung des Sternchens: „Dazu gehört auch, Frauen* und Mädchen* in der Sprache, in Wort und Schrift sichtbarer zu machen.“ In einer Handreichung wird erläutert: „Hierbei ist auf die Zielgruppe zu achten: Wenn nicht nur cis-geschlechtliche, sondern auch queere/trans* Personen angesprochen werden sollen, empfiehlt sich die Nutzung des Gendersterns.“

Hengameh Yaghoobifarah, eine nichtbinäre Person, kritisierte 2018 den „Gebrauch des Sternchens hinter gegenderten Begriffen als universale Lösung für alle […] der lange Rattenschwanz dieses nett gemeinten Sonderzeichens wird gerne ignoriert: Es impliziert, dass trans Frauen keine Frauen, sondern Frauen* sind. Also nur uneigentlich Frauen.“ Mitte 2020 argumentierte der Autor und Geschlechterforscher Till Randolf Amelung gegen eine solche Nutzung des Sterns: „Frau* oder Mann* sollen signalisieren, dass Geschlecht für eine sozial konstruierte Angelegenheit gehalten wird und Trans inkludiert werden soll. Bei Transpersonen kann jedoch der Eindruck entstehen, sie würden nicht selbstverständlich für Männer oder Frauen gehalten und dies führt dann zu ihrer Verärgerung.“

Translation:

In November 2020, the Frauenreferat (Women’s Department) of the city of Frankfurt gave a statement on the introduction of the gender star: It played a part in making women* and girls* visible in language, in speech and writing. In a handout they explained: The addressees should be considered: The gender star is recommended when not only cisgender but also queer/trans* people were addressed.

There has been critique of and arguments against the use of the gender star following terms like women: In 2018, Hengameh Yaghoobifarah, a non-binary journalist, criticized the use of the asterisk after gendered terms as a universal solution for everybody: The string of issues the well-meant special character generated was often ignored. It implied that trans women are not women, but women*, meaning not actual women. In August 2020, Till Randolf Amelung, an author who mainly writes about gender politics, argued: Woman* or man* were supposed to signal that gender was considered a social construct and trans should be included. However, he concluded that trans people could get the impression that they were not considered men or women self-evidently which upset them.

proofreading suggestions:

- "...on the introduction of the gender star, stating it played a part in making..." → in simple past to show it's reported speech and maybe 'playing a part' rather than 'include'?

- "...they explained" → also simple past because it was in 2020

- "Addressees should be considered: (...) when not only cisgender but also queer/trans people are addressed" → The only thing I changed here is the 'you' to the impersonal structure that is used in the original

- in the second paragraph you have written "the gender star after terms like women"/"after gendered terms" → I don't think you need to repeat it the second time. I'm not sure, does 'following' sound better than 'after'?

- again reported speech and shifting of tenses: 'She said the string of issues (...) was often ignored and that it implied (...)"

- a different word for 'improper women' maybe? something like 'not real/actual'?

- "argued that woman* or man* were"

- last sentence also with an introduction for reported speech like "He concluded that trans people could get (...) were not considered"