Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. once described language as “the blood of the soul into which thoughts run and out of which they grow.” This profound observation holds increasing urgency in modern discussions of gender relations, where widespread disrespect and implicit bias have normalized harmful rhetoric that erodes connection and equality across genders. Gender relations, defined as the interconnected social, cultural, economic and power dynamics that shape interactions between people of different gender identities, are deeply influenced by the everyday language we use. Today, one pervasive phrase — “man up” — stands as a striking example of how casual language perpetuates double standards and harms people of all genders.\n\nThe phrase “man up,” which is often deployed by women in positions of power and authority to criticize or dismiss men, has been allowed to spread through modern culture without meaningful pushback. What many dismiss as a harmless throwaway line actually carries layered harm that extends far beyond the immediate interaction. Fundamentally, the phrase operates on two damaging implicit assumptions: first, that traits like courage, emotional resilience, emotional regulation and strength are inherently masculine, and second, that women are inherently incapable of possessing these same qualities. This framing is exclusionary to non-binary people, unfair to men, and limiting to women, locking all genders into rigid, outdated stereotypes.\n\nIn hierarchical spaces like workplaces, the phrase is frequently used to belittle and emasculate men who deviate from narrow gender expectations, constituting a subtle but pervasive form of gender-based discrimination. For men already navigating crippling societal pressure to conform to traditional masculine norms, “man up” adds an additional layer of burden: it pressures men to suppress vulnerability, discourages healthy emotional expression, and dismisses the very real struggles men face by framing their emotions as a failure to be “masculine enough.” Even as some women who use the phrase are grappling with their own journeys of self-discovery, this does not excuse the harm that casual, gendered disrespect inflicts on broader gender relations.\n\nTo understand why a single phrase matters so much, it is critical to recognize the dual relationship between language and culture. As the late Nobel Prize-winning author Toni Morrison often noted, language is a double-edged sword: it can be oppressive, violent and censoring, or it can be liberating, life-affirming, and a tool to expand our shared understanding of humanity. Language both reflects and shapes the culture we live in; it acts as society’s operating system, influencing how we think, what we value, and how we perceive the world around us. This aligns with the theory of linguistic relativity, which holds that the structure and vocabulary of the language we use shapes our cognition, worldview, and understanding of abstract concepts — from concepts of time to core social values like equality.\n\nWhen we choose to move away from gendered idioms like “man up,” we take a concrete step to dismantle harmful stereotypes and create space for more inclusive, healthy expressions of strength and resilience. Phrases that reinforce rigid gender roles do not just harm individuals: they damage workplace dynamics, erode intimate relationships, and worsen negative mental health outcomes for people across the gender spectrum. Biased language can even drag down workplace productivity by creating uncomfortable, exclusionary environments that prevent all employees from bringing their full selves to work. To counter this, workplaces should prioritize expanding gender sensitivity training that helps employees recognize and avoid language that carries hidden gender bias.\n\nBuilding a truly equal society requires intentionality in how we speak to and about one another. Gender equality is not a one-sided project that benefits only one gender — it requires all people to reject biased language and center mutual respect and dignity as the foundation of a progressive, inclusive society. As Morrison put it: “Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge.” By choosing our words intentionally, we can build a culture that celebrates strength and resilience in all people, regardless of gender.\n\nThis commentary is from Wayne Campbell, an educator and social commentator focused on how development policies shape cultural and gender issues.