What exactly is it about? In the public debate, the discussion about gendering is very often reduced to the gender star. At the same time, the gender star is defamed in a populist and completely exaggerated manner. As a result, (alleged) examples of gendering are cited that are often truly hair-raising. So of course the term "men" is nonsense, just like "widowers". A rejection of such a practice then comes as no surprise.
What's the point? Yes, you can use the gender asterisk to gender people. And yes, the gender asterisk can indeed be used to create absurd constructions that are worthy of rejection.
However, you must not confuse or even equate gendering with gender asterisks. It is not about "gendering" in the sense of using the gender star as often as possible. It's about speaking in a "gender-appropriate" or "gender-conscious" way. This can roughly be reduced to avoiding the so-called "generic masculine", i.e. "doctor" also "means" women (and non-binary genders). The gender asterisk is only one option here. However, you can also, for example, use the couple form ("Schülerinnen und Schüler"), you can neutralize terms ("Redepult" instead of "Rednerpult"), you can substantiate terms ("Studierende" instead of "Studenten"), you can use other formulations ("Der Antrag soll vollständig ausgefüllt werden" instead of "Der Antragsteller muss den Antrag vollständig ausfüllen"), you can paraphrase or derive the term ("Vertretung" instead of "Vertreter"), you can choose gender-neutral terms ("Personen", "alle", "niemand").
Our conclusion: It is possible to write and speak in a gender-neutral way without using a gender asterisk even once. The gender asterisk has both advantages and disadvantages. The advantage is that it is actually and always gender-neutral. On the other hand, it can actually lead to problems, such as poorer legibility, non-compliance with spelling rules and problems for people with reading and visual impairments. But these can be avoided.
Significance for marketing and communication: Ultimately, it is a strategic decision whether you as a company want to consciously use the gender asterisk. If diversity is one of your values or if young, progressive people or even people from the LGBTQ* community are among your stakeholders, then "the asterisk is the message". Otherwise, it is advisable to train your employees and provide them with assistance, such as the Scompler gender check. At the same time, however, we also recommend a relaxed approach to the topic. You don't always have to consistently genderize everything and anything. Despite all the discussion, context is always important for communication. And if it is clear to readers from the context that you really mean women and other genders, it can sometimes be enough to only genderize 30% of the text. And we emphasize: Can. We consider many options to be legitimate - except for the extremes of not using gender at all or using it for everything.
If you want to read more about it:
