No “sindaca” or “avvocata”. And, those who do not comply, will have to pay a fine of five thousand euros. It is not a joke, but the latest bill born from the Carroccio. But, after the controversy, the party removes it: «Personal initiative, it is not our line»
The war on grammar lasted 24 hours before logic, launched by the League, committed every day to distinguishing itself within the government majority by identity matrix. After the clash on the Rai license fee and against mandatory vaccination, it had tried to put ties to the Italian language. Enough with “avvocata” and also with “sindaca”, the Carroccio asked. A powder keg of criticism and controversy pushed the leaders to play the buck: “The League specifies that the senator’s bill Manfredi Powerful it is a completely personal initiative. The party leaders, starting with the group leader in the Senate Maximilian Romeodo not agree with what is reported in the Potenti bill, the text of which in no way reflects the line of the League which has already asked for its immediate withdrawal”.
The proposed law “Provisions for the protection of the Italian language, with respect to gender differences” filed in the Senate, aimed to prohibit in public documents “the feminine gender for neologisms applied to institutional titles of the State, military ranks, professional titles, honorifics, and positions identified by acts having the force of law”. The text, signed by the minor Lega senator, Manfredi Powerful oldest militant in the Tuscany region, member since 1992, 42-year-old lawyer from Castiglioncello. In Parliament for six years, he finally manages to get his name on the national front pages under the “polemic of the day” column.
It was actually a draft to be submitted for drafting, but it is already very clear in the preamble: “This law intends to preserve the integrity of the Italian language and in particular, to avoid the improper modification of public titles, such as ‘Mayor’, ‘Prefect’, ‘Questor’, ‘Lawyer’ by ‘symbolic’ attempts to adapt their definition to the different sensibilities of the time”.
It reads: “It is necessary to prevent the legitimate battle for gender equality, in order to achieve visibility and consensus in society, from resorting to these excesses that do not respect institutions”, it explains. And, for this reason, it is considered “necessary a regulatory intervention that implies a containment of creativity in the use of the Italian language in institutional documents”. Article 3 on the use of the Italian language in public documents states in black and white the “prohibition of discretionary recourse to the feminine or overextended form or to any linguistic experimentation. The use of the double form or the universal masculine is permitted, to be understood in a neutral sense and without any sexist connotation”. The aim – as stated in Article 1 – is “to preserve the public administration from literal deformations deriving from the need to affirm gender equality in public texts”. Separate chapter on fines (article 5): “Violation of the obligations set forth in this law entails the application of an administrative pecuniary sanction consisting of the payment of a sum from 1,000 to 5,000 euros”
The oppositions have thus risen up. “The misogyny of the Northern League is boundless. And also ridiculous, the expression of a subculture devoid of thought and attention even to what is recommended by the Accademia della Crusca”, comments the AVS group leader in the Chamber Luana Zanella. For the party colleague, Aurora Floridiathis initiative “represents a serious step backwards in the long and tiring fight for gender equality”. But reactions are not long in coming from the Democratic Party either: “According to the League, in the name of the Italian language, we should sanction those who speak Italian correctly. The troglodytes who would do anything to remove respect for the female gender should read Treccani”, intervenes the Democrat Michaela DiBiase. And the senator Cristina Tajani, to substantiate his arguments, he dusts off a prayer: “…Come then, our advocate, turn your merciful eyes towards us” … who knows if Senator Potenti, who proposes to prohibit the use of the professional feminine, will also want to fine the faithful who recite the Salve Regina”.
Sociolinguist Vera Gheno also criticizes this, explaining in the columns of Corriere della Sera: «First of all, Senator Potenti and those who proposed this bill are people who ignore the history of the language itself which they say they want to defend: feminine forms have existed since very ancient times (see ministra and especially avvocata, one of the names of the Madonna), so it is not a question of any “experimentation”. Second, the idea of sanctioning those who do not conform to their ignorance is worthy of the worst totalitarian regimes, congratulations. This desire to repress those who use gender language is the best demonstration of how these people are in bad faith when they downplay the relevance: if feminine nouns were unimportant, they wouldn’t go to such great lengths to ban them.”
Source: lespresso.it
