Simone Lawson
The United States Constitution, ratified in 1787, does not explicitly mention women or limit any of its rights or privileges to males. The word person or persons is used, which is gender-neutral. However, the interpretation of the law was informed by common law inherited from British precedents, and many state laws were not gender-neutral. While the Constitution does not use the words man or woman, it also does not include the words abortion, contraceptives, right to privacy, or separation of church and state, all matters on which the Supreme Court has pronounced. The Constitution's use of gendered pronouns, such as he when referring to the President, has been a topic of debate, with some arguing for more gender-neutral language to acknowledge a woman's ability to hold office.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Does the US Constitution mention women? | No, the US Constitution does not explicitly mention women. |
| Does the US Constitution mention men? | Yes, the US Constitution uses the pronoun "he" when referring to the President of the United States. |
| Does the US Constitution imply male exclusivity? | No, the use of "he" can be interpreted as gender-neutral, leaving open the possibility of the antecedent being a man or a woman. |
| Does the US Constitution limit rights or privileges to males? | No, the Constitution uses the word "persons," which is gender-neutral. |
| Were there debates about including women? | Yes, there were debates during the Constitutional Convention, and advocates of persons over property prevailed, making it clear that "persons" included women. |
| Were there any attempts to change the gendered pronouns? | Yes, there have been petitions and attempts to change the Constitution's pronouns, but they face massive political hurdles. |
Explore related products
$52.99 $52.99
What You'll Learn
- The US Constitution uses the pronoun he when referring to the President
- The word persons is used in the Constitution, which is gender-neutral
- The Records of the Federal Convention include an explicit reference to women
- The Fourteenth Amendment included the word male in connection with voting
- The Constitution does not mention slavery, slaveholding, nor slave
The US Constitution uses the pronoun he when referring to the President
The US Constitution, ratified in 1787, uses the pronoun "he" when referring to the President of the United States. This is unsurprising given the historical context, as women could not vote at the time. The Constitution states:
> "He shall hold his office during the term of four years."
It also says that when a bill is presented to the President:
> "If he approves he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it."
The use of "he" and "his" in these examples is notable, and some have argued that these pronouns should be updated to reflect the possibility of a female president. While the pronouns can be interpreted as gender-neutral, leaving open the possibility of a female or male antecedent, the exclusive use of "he" contributes to a culture where men are seen as fundamentally different from women.
Changing the Constitution's pronouns, however, would face significant political challenges. It would require a two-thirds vote in both the US House and Senate, as well as approval by three-quarters of state legislatures. Despite these obstacles, some individuals have started petitions to raise awareness and spark discussion about this issue.
It is worth noting that the word ""persons" was used in the Constitution instead of "men," indicating an inclusive intention, even if the language used to describe specific roles, such as the presidency, remains gendered.
The Constitution: Spanish-American War Expansion
You may want to see also
The word persons is used in the Constitution, which is gender-neutral
The United States Constitution does not mention women or limit any of its rights and privileges to males. Instead, the gender-neutral word ""persons" is used. The Constitution was ratified in 1787, when women could not vote, which explains the use of masculine pronouns such as "he" when referring to the President of the United States. However, the use of "persons" instead of "men" indicates an inclusive intent, as it would have been easy to use the word "men" to refer only to males.
The Records of the Federal Convention, which include notes taken by James Madison and other participants in the Constitutional Convention, provide evidence that women were discussed during the debates. While the final, edited version of the Constitution does not explicitly mention women, the delegates' use of "persons" indicates their understanding that women were included. This shift from property to persons as the basis for representation made it difficult to justify excluding women.
The interpretation of the Constitution's gendered language has evolved over time. While the use of "he" and "him" in reference to the President and other officials may have been acceptable in the past, the presence of women candidates and a female winner of the popular vote in the 2020 election has brought attention to the need for more inclusive language. A petition has been created to raise awareness and encourage discussion about changing the Constitution's pronouns, acknowledging that this would face significant political challenges.
The first major constitutional change to affect women's rights was the Fourteenth Amendment, which included the word "male" in connection with voting. This amendment was designed to overturn the Dred Scott decision, which found that Black people "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect." The women's rights movement split over whether to support the amendment due to its establishment of racial equality in voting versus its explicit denial of women's voting rights.
In summary, the use of the word "persons" in the Constitution is gender-neutral and inclusive, reflecting the intention to protect society and ensure equal representation. While the document does not explicitly mention women, the delegates' debates and the interpretation of the law have provided context for understanding the inclusion of women. The evolution of gender equality and women's rights has led to ongoing discussions about the need for more inclusive language in the Constitution.
Social Media and the Constitution: Who's in Control?
You may want to see also
The Records of the Federal Convention include an explicit reference to women
The reference to women was made during one of the most important moments of one of the most important debates. The reference wasn’t supposed to be there, and no historian or political theorist had ever noticed these words before. The reigning assumption was that women were not mentioned in the Constitution.
The Records of the Federal Convention shed light on the debates and discussions that took place during the Constitutional Convention. James Madison's notes, along with those of other participants, provide valuable insights into the thoughts and deliberations of the delegates. Madison, who had studied republics and confederacies before the convention, played a significant role in shaping the convention's deliberations. His notes offer a detailed account of the convention's proceedings, including the debates, straw votes, and the delegates' pledge to secrecy.
The inclusion of women in the Records of the Federal Convention is significant because it indicates that gender was a part of the discussion, even if it was not the main focus. The use of the term "sex" in the debates and the choice to use the word "persons" instead of "men" in the Constitution suggest that the framers intended to include women in the government's representation. However, the explicit inclusion of women was quickly edited out, leaving their presence in the Constitution shadowy and open to interpretation.
Overall, the Records of the Federal Convention provide valuable insights into the thinking and deliberations of the delegates during the Constitutional Convention. The explicit reference to women, although not widely recognized, highlights the complex dynamics of gender and representation during the formation of the American government.
US and Russia: Constitutionally Similar?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Fourteenth Amendment included the word male in connection with voting
The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified on July 9, 1868, affirmed the new rights of freed women and men. The law stated that everyone born in the United States, including former slaves, was an American citizen. No state could pass a law that took away their rights to "life, liberty, or property." The Fourteenth Amendment also added the first explicit mention of gender into the US Constitution. It declared that all male citizens over twenty-one years old should be able to vote.
The insertion of the word "male" into the Constitution presented new challenges for women's rights activists. For the first time, the Constitution asserted that men—and not women—had the right to vote. Previously, only state laws restricted voting rights to men. Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote, "If that word 'male' be inserted, it will take us a century at least to get it out." Stanton and Susan B. Anthony objected to the Fifteenth Amendment, which affirmed that the right to vote "shall [not] be denied...on account of race." They wanted women to be included alongside black men.
The Fourteenth Amendment's reference to "male" citizens in the context of voting was a significant moment in the history of women's suffrage in the United States. While the amendment granted important rights to African Americans, it also highlighted the exclusion of women from the franchise. This prompted activists to focus their efforts on woman suffrage, leading to the establishment of rival national organizations dedicated to winning women the right to vote.
It is worth noting that the use of gendered language in the Constitution has been a subject of debate and interpretation. Some argue that the use of pronouns such as "he" and "his" in reference to certain offices can be read as gender-neutral or generic, leaving open the possibility that the antecedent could be either a man or a woman. However, others have interpreted the use of these pronouns as an indication that only men could hold these offices.
The Constitution and Congress: A Historical Perspective
You may want to see also
The Constitution does not mention slavery, slaveholding, nor slave
The Constitution of the United States does not explicitly mention "slavery, slaveholding, nor slave". The closest it comes to doing so is in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 1, which is one of a handful of provisions related to slavery, though it does not use the word "slave". This clause prohibited the federal government from limiting the importation of "persons" where existing state governments allowed it, until 20 years after the Constitution took effect.
The omission of the word "slave" was intentional, as the framers of the Constitution recognised that it would sully the document. Luther Martin, a Maryland delegate to the Constitutional Convention who opposed ratification, explained to the Maryland legislature in 1787 that the authors of the Constitution did not use the word slave because they "anxiously sought to avoid the admission of expressions which might be odious in the ears of Americans".
Despite this, slavery received important protections in the Constitution. The Three-Fifths Clause in Article I, Section 2, counted three-fifths of a state's slave population when apportioning representation, giving the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. This clause has been used to argue that the Constitution was a pro-slavery document, as it purportedly meant that slaves were considered less than fully human. However, Frederick Douglass believed that it encouraged freedom because it gave "an increase of 'two-fifths' of political power to free over slave states".
The omission of the word "slave" in the Constitution has been interpreted in different ways throughout history. Thurgood Marshall, the first African American to sit on the Supreme Court, pointed out that the framers had left out a majority of Americans when they wrote the phrase, "We the People". He argued that the framers "consented to a document which laid a foundation for the tragic events which were to follow". On the other hand, abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison claimed that the Constitution was a pro-slavery document, burning it in 1854 and calling it "a covenant with death and an agreement with Hell". Abraham Lincoln, on the other hand, contended that the Constitution put slavery "in the course of ultimate extinction".
Lockdown Orders: Unconstitutional Violation of Rights?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No, the words "man" and "woman" are not in the US Constitution. However, the pronoun "he" is used when referring to the President of the United States.
The US Constitution uses the word "persons" which is gender-neutral. The Constitution was also written at a time when women could not vote.
No, but there have been attempts to change the Constitution's pronouns. Changing the Constitution would require a two-thirds vote in both the US House and Senate, and approval by three-quarters of state legislatures.
