A thematic analysis of attitudes towards gender-neutral pronouns in Dutch

As gender-neutral pronouns gain visibility, they fill a linguistic gap which has long existed in several languages for referring to individuals outside the traditional binary, and they constitute an alternative to masculine generics (Renström & Klysing, 2024). While some embrace gender-neutral pronouns as a step toward greater inclusivity, others are critical of this language change. Sociolinguistically, the subject is particularly interesting, as gender-inclusive language (GIL) is an area under reconstruction (Ivanov & Lange, 2024). The current study explores attitudes towards Dutch gender-neutral pronouns by analysing participants’ comments from broader survey experiments that tested the comprehensibility and appreciation of these pronouns (N = 1,358). Although they were never explicitly asked to share their opinions on GIL, 252 participants took the opportunity to do so. The relevant comments were subjected to thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022). While the analysis was largely inductive, it was shaped by the following research questions: RQ1: What reasons do people spontaneously bring up to argue for or against gender-neutral pronouns – or, more broadly, gender-inclusive language? RQ2: Are there varying opinions towards different gender-neutral pronoun combinations (i.e., hen-hen-hun, die-hen-hun, die-die-diens, or a slash form combining a feminine, masculine and gender-neutral pronoun zij/hij/die-haar/hem/hen-haar/zijn/hun)? Four main themes were identified in the dataset, by searching for the ideological underpinnings that are shared by several of the participants' overt responses: 1) Language should reflect reality, 2) Language is separate from reality, 3) The linguistic status quo should be defended, 4) Clear communication should be prioritised. The themes identified in this study will be compared to earlier qualitative research which has documented attitudes towards GIL (Blaubergs, 1980; Hekanaho, 2020, 2022; Parks & Roberton, 1998; Vergoossen et al., 2020). The comparative perspective allows us to see whether arguments for and against GIL are similar or different across linguistic contexts and at different stages of language change. Identifying and understanding attitudes towards gender-neutral pronouns and their underlying ideologies should be considered and addressed when implementing GIL strategies (Vergoossen et al. 2020).