The masculine plural, a reflex that no longer goes unnoticed
For a long time, the masculine plural was taken for granted. At school, we were taught it without question: "the masculine prevails over the feminine." End of story. Today, this little phrase resonates very differently. It offends, raises questions, sparks debate.
The French language is not static. It lives, it evolves, it absorbs the changes in society. And what once seemed a simple grammatical habit has now become a highly political and social issue. Behind the masculine plural, it is our way of thinking about gender, the place of women, and non-binary identities that is being called into question.
A historical legacy… that is starting to take its toll.
The use of masculine pronouns to refer to mixed groups is not accidental, nor is it an act of innocent neutrality. It is the result of a history in which grammar was codified during a period heavily marked by male dominance.
Grammarians of the 17th and 18th centuries explicitly chose to favor the masculine form, considered more "noble" than the feminine. These choices, at the time, had a lasting influence on writing and speaking. As a result, "les Français" (the French) was assumed to include French women, "les étudiants" (the students) included female students, and so on.
For decades, this rule was applied without being seriously questioned. The masculine plural gradually became synonymous with the idea of the neuter, as if the masculine could represent everyone without causing any problems.
When grammar intersects with the struggles for equality
With feminist movements and discussions on gender equality, this supposed neutrality is being seriously challenged. Many people do not identify with a masculinity presented as "universal".
Two opposing views often emerge:
On one hand, a so-called "traditional" approach, which considers that the masculine plural excludes no one, that it is merely a practical convention.
On the other hand, a more inclusive, which believes that this convention renders women invisible and leaves no room for non-binary people.
In short, the question is no longer simply "is it correct?", but "who is named? who is omitted?". Grammar becomes a mirror of our power relations, of how visibility is distributed within the sentence... and in society.
Language manipulation to include everyone
Faced with this unease, new practices are emerging, often first in activist, academic, and associative circles, then in businesses and institutions.
Among the most frequent leads are:
-
The double inflection, with formulations like "female and male students" and "female and male citizens," is longer, but it has the merit of explicitly naming everyone.
-
The feminine is put forwardto reverse the habit: starting with "female and male employees", for example, or choosing the feminine in certain contexts to break with the masculine norm.
-
The mid-point, very present in the debate: "les étudiants·e·s", "les auteurs·rice·s". This form seeks to include several genders in the same word, while maintaining a recognizable structure.
These solutions are not universally accepted. Some people find them cumbersome to speak, difficult to read, or hard to teach. Others, on the contrary, see them as a necessary step to make visible those who were previously invisible.
School, work, institutions: inclusive language is taking hold
Discussions about the masculine plural are not confined to expert forums. They have very concrete effects on how reports, emails, teaching materials, and company charters are written.
In the professional world, more and more organizations are adopting inclusive language guidelines. These include advice on avoiding generic masculine forms, favouring epicene formulations (such as "the teaching staff", "the medical staff") or using double inflection in official documents.
In the educational field, some teachers are already choosing to vary their phrasing, to emphasize the feminine form, or to explain to students that the rule "the masculine prevails over the feminine" is neither neutral nor eternal. These practices are not uniform, but they demonstrate a real awareness: the way we speak in the classroom is just as important as the content of the lesson.
Even major institutions are starting to take a stand. Public bodies, research centers, and universities are publishing recommendations to move towards a more inclusive language. We're not yet at the stage of a massive reform, but things are changing.
A question of grammar… and of perspective on the world
One might be tempted to reduce all of this to a quarrel among specialists. However, the debate goes far beyond the linguistic sphere.
Language does not simply describe reality, it helps to shape it. When, out of habit, we systematically use the masculine plural to talk about a mixed group, we end up spontaneously associating the masculine with the general, the universal, and the feminine with the exception or the detail.
Changing certain language habits is not simply a matter of "adding midpoints" or writing slightly longer sentences. It is a profound alteration of how we distribute the symbolic place of each individual within the collective narrative.
What language do we want to move towards?
The question is not whether the French language will evolve: it already is. The real question is which direction to take.
Younger generations, more aware of gender issues, readily experiment, blending traditional forms with new expressions, and questioning the rules their elders learned without question. This sometimes creates tension and misunderstandings, but also provides a rich field for reflection.
The masculine plural is no longer an indisputable given; it is one choice among others. One can decide to maintain it, circumvent it, or supplement it, provided one is clear about what this choice implies.
Ultimately, rethinking this rule isn't about "waging war on grammar." It's about seeking a language that better reflects the society we live in, a language where everyone can see themselves, recognize themselves, and feel valued. And that's undoubtedly where the heart of the matter lies.
