Linguistic Sexism in the News Coverage of Women Ministers From Four Italian Governments

Abstract

The study, a descriptive type, is focused on the role of language in confirming or changing stereotypical feminine representations through a linguistic analysis of Italian newspaper communication concerning women politicians. It explored sexism/nonsexism in political communication on 20 female ministers from four different Italian governments (2006, 2008, 2011, and 2013). It was conducted by textual analysis of 1,244 press headlines with the Spad-t statistical package. Results showed an overutilization of sexist language and variations in the degree of linguistic sexism with respect to different periods (less sexism in the headlines of the last two governments). In this way, findings underlined the conservative role of newspapers that eclipses women’s active contribution, maintains their secondary role, and preserves politics as essentially alien to the female universe. This trend appears sensitive to the cultural and political context showing an increase of linguistic nonsexism in the time paralleled to an increase in the number of women parliamentarians.

Keywords

women in politics political communication and language sexist versus nonsexist language lexicographical analysis

Social science research has shown the dominance of an androcentric orientation of language, which reflects the masculine paradigm in contemporary society. Such linguistic androcentrism acts through specific devices that have been more salient for gender-marked languages, such as romance languages, including Italian. Over the past few years, high attention has been drawn to the relationship between language and gender issues, also from a social-psychological perspective (Leaper, 2014), underlying the importance for conducting more studies on this topic. Inserted in this call to focus on the role of language to confirm or change stereotypical feminine representations, the present work applies a linguistic analysis of Italian newspaper communication concerning women politicians.

International research has shown that mass media plays an important role as a factor hindering women’s participation in politics (Bystrom, 2004; Bystrom, Robertson, & Banwart, 2001; Edwards, 2009; Falk, 2007; Jalalzai, 2006;Martìn Rojo, 2006; Smith, 1997). Because of the ability to either sustain or counter gender stereotypes, mass communication represents one of the causes of women’s difficult access to politics. The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), the international organization that also monitors the gender composition of parliaments around the world, in an effort to emphasize the gendered nature of mass communication and its impact, stressed that

the media have a crucial and increasing role in shaping the image of politicians. Instead of acting as mere mirrors of the social and cultural traditional patterns, the media should become an agent of change through their approach to women or rather to gender at large. (IPU, 1997)

In the present study, exploring language from a social-psychological perspective (Holtgraves, 2014), we assume that language in political communication can institutionalize and constantly reproduce or contrast the current societal rules. We adopt a comparative focus on media representations of female politicians holding different political and cultural orientations. The object of the study is news coverage of 20 female ministers across four different Italian governments’ expression of diverse political stances. In particular, these include the 2006 center-left government run by Romano Prodi, the 2008 center-right government run by Silvio Berlusconi, the 2011 technical government run by Mario Monti, and the 2013 center-left broad coalition government run by Enrico Letta.

The study explores some gendered and political dynamics underlying language in women’s representation in the Italian press. Through the lenses of specific linguistic devices, this contribution is an effort to uncover, if any, sexist assumptions in the formulation of headlines. By highlighting how some language devices are used to manipulate gender identity, we will assess whether the news discourse is strategically shaped to weaken or strengthen women’s role in the political arena, where they have been traditionally marginalized. In effect, we will demonstrate how some linguistic devices are sensitive to the cultural and political context as the degree of sexism changes over time, showing a diachronic reduction of sexist linguistic forms that parallels an incremental presence of women in politics.

Sexist Language From a Social-Psychological Perspective

Within social psychology, there is a research tradition on the psychological implications of the sexist use of language. In reviewing such literature, Mucchi-Faina (2005) illustrates some common linguistic features that either highlight or conceal gender identity. Some of these have been questioned for their sexist nature and their discriminatory implications, under a feminist perspective supported by most of the linguists. The primary sexist forms consist of the generic masculine and the dissymmetric feminine. The generic masculine ultimately makes women invisible as gender is unspecified and the masculine form is used to indicate both sexes; the dissymmetric feminine makes gender visible though such visibility is based on a lexical asymmetry adopted for women only. If a language reform should promote a nonsexist usage of language—Mucchi-Faina (2005) concluded—this could be done by means of inclusion, that is, adopting comprehensive terms encompassing both sexes, or by means of visibility, that is, using or creating specific feminine forms that render the gender explicit and manifest though on neutral grounds.

Further research demonstrated the role of specific linguistic categories in promoting and reinforcing prejudices and gender stereotypes more or less deliberately (Sczesny, Moser, & Wood, 2015). So the gender-exclusive rather than gender-inclusive language forms undermine women’s motivation, self-esteem, professional performances, and their very persuasive efficacy (see, e.g., Cralley & Ruscher, 2005; McConnell & Fazio, 1996; Merkel, Maass, & Frommelt, 2012; Mucchi-Faina, 2005). This literature has empirically shown the negative consequences, especially on women, of the use of specific linguistic forms, such as the generic masculine.

Objectives of the Current Research

The current research, a descriptive type, explores linguistic media representations of women in politics and holding governmental appointments. More precisely, we scrutinize the interplay of media language and women’s political positioning with the ultimate goal of identifying which linguistic devices support and promote as well as prevent and inhibit female political engagement and visibility.

At the procedural level, we operationalized our research goals into the objective to reveal the presence, in headlines about 20 women ministers from four different governments (2006, 2008, 2011, 2013), of three specific grammatical forms: generic masculine (e.g., “ministr o ” = male minster), dissymmetric feminine (with the feminine definite article before the surname, e.g., “ la Fornero”), specific feminine (in this case with the recently introduced and still unusual feminization of a typically masculine word, e.g., “ministr a ” = female minister). Subsequently, these forms were recoded in terms of sexist language (generic masculine, dissymmetric feminine) as opposed to a nonsexist one (specific feminine) to verify the level of discrimination and effective visibility of women politicians.

Based on the findings from the social psychological literature (Hershey & Sullivan, 1977), we explored analytically the assumption that right and center-right stances should be more grounded on highly traditional gender stereotypes than left-wing positions. Therefore, we expect to find a greater use of sexist language in representations of the center-right female ministers than for the center-left ones, thus reflecting social representations ingrained into gender stereotypes. In addition, at the diachronic level, we assume an increase of nonsexist linguistic forms over time due to the growing presence of women in politics and to broader cultural processes that reduce discrimination against women.

Method

Materials

The analysis of the last four Italian governments before the Renzi government (2006, 2008, 2011, and 2013) comprised a total of 1,244 headlines, published across five newspapers. The headlines were inclusive of subheadings and nut graphs. The time frame considered ranges from the first day in which the government was formed to 9 weeks later. We chose this temporal span because it corresponds to the phase when all the new ministers are presented to the public, and therefore, the debate is more heated and exposed to any gender bias.

We focused our analysis on headlines because they are functional to the scope of the present research for their capacity to “frame” and act as “cognitive shortcuts.” On one side, headlines act as an interpretive framework within which to situate the full news story (Condit et al., 2001; León, 1997); on the other side, headlines function as cognitive shortcuts as, by calling attention, they guide and filter the reader’s understanding (Andrew, 2007).

Headlines were identified with the support of the electronic database Quidat the Senate Library in Rome. When inputting the ministers’ own surname and/or first name, these had to appear either in the headline, or in the subheadlines and nut graphs.The 20 women ministers are distributed as follows: 6 ministers of the center-left government run by Romano Prodi in 2006 (fr. 291), 4 ministers of the center-right government run by Silvio Berlusconi in 2008 (fr. 159), 3 ministers of the technical government run by Mario Monti in 2011 (fr. 480), 7 ministers of the broad coalition government, more center-left oriented, also with 2 ministers of center-right orientation, run by Enrico Letta in 2013 (fr. 314).

Procedures and Measures

For the data analysis, the headlines were imported into a textual file. As mentioned above, in the textual file we detected and measured the presence of three specific linguistic forms: generic masculine, dissymmetric feminine, and specific feminine. The first two were considered as sexist linguistic forms, the third as a nonsexist linguistic form. In relation to the specific feminine, given that forms perceived as unusual and ungrammatical (Merkel et al., 2012) can be used in a derisive manner, thus implying in our case the specific feminine also to be a form of sexism, we controlled the context of use of the linguistic form “ministra,” with the aim to decide the attribution in sexist or nonsexist language.

Statistical Analysis

We conducted a lexicographical analysis of all the headline words with the statistical package Spad-t for textual analysis (Lebart, Morineau, & Bécue, 1989). In particular, we used the Mots (Words) step to obtain the frequency distribution of the overall vocabulary, which permits us to control the frequencies of the three linguistic forms. On this basis, we offered a first descriptive analysis focusing on the frequency of the lexicographical data. They were then recoded into two categories of sexist/nonsexist language. In order to compare the frequencies of data from four governments we used the chi-square allowing for the comparison of observed and expected frequencies.

Results

Descriptive Analysis of the Three Linguistic Forms

Table 1 shows the results related to the generic masculine, dissymmetric feminine, and specific feminine. We should observe how the generic masculine is mostly utilized when reporting news about the Monti government, with higher frequencies than the expected ones, while for the other governments, frequencies are lower than the expected ones. By contrast, a reverse trend characterizes the dissymmetric feminine, as frequencies prove lower than the expected ones only for the Monti government. Finally, frequencies for specific feminine show higher frequencies for the last two governments (χ² = 54.28; df = 6, p< .001).

Table 1.

Distribution of the Three Specific Linguistic Forms by Four Governments.

Linguistic forms	Frequencies	Governments								Total
Linguistic forms	Frequencies	2006—Prodi		2008—Berlusconi		2011—Monti		2013—Letta		Total
Generic masculine	Observed	81		65		237		98		481
	Expected	104.8		70.9		204.4		100.8
	Row %	16.8		13.5		49.3		20.4		100
	Column %		43.6		51.6		65.3		54.8
Dissymmetric feminine	Observed	96		56		86		58		296
	Expected	64.5		43.7		125.1		62.0
	Row %	32.4		18.9		29.1		19.6		100
	Column %		51.6		44.4		23.7		32.4
Specific feminine	Observed	9		5		40		23		77
	Expected	16.8		11.4		32.7		16.1
	Row %	11.7		6.5		51.9		29.9		100
	Column %		4.8		4.0		11.0		12.8
Total		186	100	126	100	363	100	179	100	854

Note. Critical χ² (df = 6, .001) = 22.46; χ² = 54.28.

The findings regarding the use of the dissymmetric feminine, with the definite article placed before women’s surnames, deserves particular discussion. The dissymmetric feminine is the most widespread form of sexism for the center-left government led by Romano Prodi, and it remains utilized, even though to a lesser extent, in the subsequent center-right government headed by Berlusconi. However, its usage decreases sharply with the Monti technical government and remains slightly underutilized even when the broad coalition government run by Letta is established. Although the use of the dissymmetric feminine gives visibility to the female gender, it does so by discriminating women, since the Italian language does not ordinarily include the definite article before the name for men. Yet, though the generic masculine and the dissymmetric feminine are both forms of sexist language, they operate linguistically in a sharply different way. While the former fully obfuscates gender specificities, the latter sheds light on gender identities, though with implicit discrimination.

Results concerning context of use of the specific feminine showed a prevalence of neutral contexts, with a very small number of negative contexts for the center-right dailies, and no uses in a derisive way. Thus in successive recoding we could consider all forms of specific feminine as nonsexist.

Here is one example of a headline using the specific feminine in a negative context (from Il Giornale, a right-wing newspaper): “La ministra non tutta italiana vuole fare diventare tutti italiani. La Kyenge ha dichiarato di non appartenere completamente alla nazione non c’è da stupirsi se antepone le rivendicazioni degli stranieri alle esigenze dei nostri connazionali” [The female, not completely Italian minister (she was the first Afro-Italian to be a minister) wants to make everyone Italian. The Kyenge has declared herself to not belong entirely to the nation. It is not surprising if she puts the claims of foreigners before of the needs of our countrymen].

Descriptive Analysis of Sexist/Nonsexist Language

Table 2 collects the frequencies in terms of sexist/nonsexist language. Throughout all the headlines, sexist language is prevalent in more than 90% of cases, with less than 10% being nonsexist language. However, throughout the last two governments, we should note a reduction of sexist language, in correspondence with an increment of nonsexist language (χ² = 14.95; df = 3, p< .01).

Table 2.

Frequencies of Linguistic Sexism/Nonsexism by Four Governments.

Linguistic sexism/nonsexism	Frequencies	Governments								Total
Linguistic sexism/nonsexism	Frequencies	2006—Prodi		2008—Berlusconi		2011—Monti		2013—Letta		Total
Sexism	Observed	177		121		323		156		777
	Expected	169.3		114.6		330.3		162.8
	Row %	88.3		93.5		48.1		70.1		100
	Column %		95.2		96.0		89.0		87.2
Nonsexism	Observed	9		5		40		23		77
	Expected	16.8		11.4		32.7		16.1
	Row %	11.7		6.5		51.9		29.9		100
	Column %		4.8		4.0		11.0		12.8
Total		186	100	126	100	363	100	179	100	854

Note. Critical χ² (df = 3, .01) = 11.34; χ² = 14.95.

This trend has paralleled the expanding development of women’s participation in parliamentary politics. The process began in 2013, though it had been anticipated by the 2011 technical government headed by Monti with the attribution to female leaders of all those ministries that are typically masculine in scope and importance, such as, for example, Ministry of Home Affairs or Ministry of Justice.

Conclusion

The survey presented so far, answering to the call for more research on gender, language, and political communication, showed how Italian journalistic communication is still far from performing a leading role in promoting the gender and social change endorsed by the IPU (1997). In contrast, the results showed the conservative role of newspapers with an overutilization of sexist language in headlines, particularly of the generic masculine. This proves functional to eclipse women’s active contribution, to maintain their secondary role and reproduce their lower status, and to preserve politics as essentially alien to the female universe.

The process, contrary to what we assumed, is not sensitive to the political orientation of ministers, while it is linked to the context that shows an increase in the number of women parliamentarians in the time paralleled to increasing nonsexist linguistic forms. So the trend favorable to sexism is similar for the first two governments, that of the left-wing of Prodi and that of the right-wing of Berlusconi, whereas in the last two governments sexism decreased and nonsexism increased.

The systematic overrepresentation of a sexist language, in the form of generic masculine and of dissymmetric feminine, makes discrimination routinized and less visible (Ng, 2007). This process of normalization of gender stereotypes has a pervasive negative impact on the public at large and particularly among women themselves, as demonstrated by social-psychological research in the field. In our case, for example, the overuse of the generic masculine “ministro” (male minister) for women politicians creates a collective imagination in which they are excluded from politics, perceived as a typically androcentric world. Definitely those linguistic practices work as an underlying system for a discriminatory approach to women, by means of justification, crystallization, and reification of power inequalities along with an implicit legitimization of male dominance. Unveiling the value of these linguistic practices might be a little step on the path toward women’s emancipation.

Within this widespread overutilization of sexist forms, as mentioned, there has recently been an increase in practicing nonsexist forms of language. Particularly, over the last two governments, there has been an increasingly common use of the specific feminine in journalistic communication, which ensured higher visibility to gender identity. Whether this trend will relapse or stabilize in the near future is unknown; however, it should be investigated further. Similarly, whether the context of use of the specific feminine will remain unchanged or whether that negative implication highlighted in our results will make it even more nuanced should be monitored. Furthermore, scrutiny should be extended to whether such minimal negative connotation will still be adopted by center-right newspapers, as a consequence of a cultural heritage closer to stereotypical gender roles (Hershey & Sullivan, 1977; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999).

Even though the present study offers some interesting indications about gender discriminatory linguistic devices in Italian political communication, the comparative lens should be extended to the cultural-political orientation of the newspapers as well as to the gender dimension by promoting a comparison between representations of men and women actively engaged in the political arena.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank the anonymous reviewers and Howard Giles for their helpful comments, which improved this article. We also want to thank our undergraduates and graduands for the collection of headlines and their transcription.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Gilda Sensales is an associate professor of social and political psychology at University Sapienza of Rome. Her research focuses on political behavior and communication, linguistic gender differences, and history of social and political psychology.

Alessandra Areni is an associate professor of psychometrics at University Sapienza of Rome. Her research activity concerns statistical and lexicographic analysis applied mainly to political and gender issues.

Alessandra Dal Secco received her PhD from Sapienza University and undertook her postdoctoral studies at London Metropolitan University. She is currently working at the National Institute for Health, Migration and Poverty as a clinical psychologist and researcher. Her research areas focus on gender issues, trauma and violence, political psychology, and history of social psychology.

References

Andrew

B. C.

(2007). Media-generated shortcuts: Do newspaper headlines present another roadblock for low-information rationality? International Journal of Press/Politics, 12, 24-43.

Bystrom

D. G.

(2004). Women as political communication sources and audiences. In Kaid

L. L.

(Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 435-459). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bystrom

D. G.

Robertson

T. A.

Banwart

M. C.

(2001). Framing the fight: An analysis of media coverage of female and male candidates in primary races for governor and senate in 2000. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 1999-2013.

Condit

C. M.

Ferguson

Kassel

Thadhani

Gooding

H. C.

Parrott

(2001). An exploratory study of the impact of news headlines on genetic determinism. Science Communication, 22, 379-395.

Cralley

E. L.

Ruscher

J. B.

(2005). Lady, girl, female, or woman: Sexism and cognitive busyness predict use of gender-biased nouns. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 24, 300-314.

Edwards

J. L.

(2009). Gender and political communication in America. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Falk

(2007). Women for president: Media bias in eight campaigns. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Hershey

M. R.

Sullivan

(1977). Sex role attitudes, identities, and political ideology. Sex Roles, 3, 37-57.

Holtgraves

T. M.

(2014). Languages and social psychology. In Holtgraves

(Ed.), Oxford handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 1-10). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

10.

Inter-Parliamentary Union. (1997). Women politicians in the media. Retrieved from http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/media.htm

11.

Jalalzai

(2006). Women candidates and the media: 1992-2000 elections. Politics and Policy, 34, 606-633.

12.

Leaper

(2014). Gender similarities and differences in language use. In Holtgraves

(Ed.), Oxford handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 62-81). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

13.

Lebart

Morineau

Bécue

(1989). Spad.T Système Portable pour l’Analyse des Données Textuelles [Spad.T.Portable System for Textual Data Analysis]. Paris, France: Cisia.

14.

León

(1997). The effects of headlines and summaries on news comprehension and recall. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 85-106.

15.

Martìn Rojo

. (2006). Gender and political discourse. In Brown

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics(2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 742-749). Oxford, England: Elsevier.

16.

McConnell

Fazio

R. H.

(1996). Women as men and people: Effects of gender-marked language. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1004-1013.

17.

Merkel

Maass

Frommelt

(2012). Shielding women against status loss: The masculine form and its alternatives in the Italian language, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31, 311-320.

18.

Mucchi-Faina

(2005). Visible or influential? Language reforms and gender (in)equality. Social Science Information, 44, 189-215.

19.

S. H.

(2007). Language-based discrimination. Blatant and subtle forms. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26, 106-122.

20.

Sczesny

Moser

Wood

(2015). Beyond sexist beliefs: How do people decide to use gender-inclusive language? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 943-954.

21.

Sidanius

Pratto

(1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

22.

Smith

K. B.

(1997). When all’s fair: Signs of parity in media coverage of female candidates. Political Communication, 14, 71-81.