presented via the platform by Sara Flores, a marketing student, with the purpose of achieving the elimination of the expressions the fair sex and the weaker sex, defined in the dictionary as ‘women in general’. The press took it for granted that this revendication was responsible for the Academy’s revision of the definition:

Thousands of signatures oblige the RAE to revise the definition of “the weaker sex” when referring to women (publico.es, 3-III-17).

However, the RAE denied in other news, published on the same day in another newspaper, that the reason was the pressure of the social networks, as the modification of the entry of the weaker sex had already been approved in 2015, waiting to be incorporated into the next revision. It was explained that the modification would involve adding a label to indicate that it was a “derogatory or discriminatory” expression; likewise, the entry the stronger sex (‘men in general’) would include a label “in an ironic sense”. Under no circumstances did the Academy intend to eliminate the meaning, because it was documented both in everyday use and in written texts: “The RAE does not go into whether or not an expression is appropriate”. On this occasion, it was the writer and academic Soledad Puértolas who confirmed to the newspaper the change that would take place.

The RAE will review the definition of ‘ the weaker sex’. The modification will be made in December in the digital version of the ‘Dictionary’ (elpais.com, 3-III-17).

The same academic was taken as an authority in the following article, where reference was made to the fact that the controversy unleashed in the networks, forced the RAE to publicly enter into the debate and give an answer. Puértolas manifested to be against the elimination of the definition and defended adding a label “One cannot and should not erase what does not appeal to us. The memory of history cannot be erased, if it could be, it would seem as if we had arrived here by waving a magic wand “:

The weaker sex? Public woman? The controversy over the “sexist” terms which still exist in the dictionary of the Royal Academy (bbc.com, 8-III-17).

The following article showed, from the headlines, a clear positioning regarding the sexism of the Academy; providing, as an argument from authority, the statements of three academics whose commitment to equality was manifest:

RAE academics wish to give “some feminist splendour” to the language

Soledad Puértolas, Carme Riera and Inés Fernández Ordóñez are three academics who advocate eliminating the sexist meaning of words (eldiario.es, 6-IV-17).

In the body of the text, the words of the journalist were very explicit when referring to the misogyny of the Academy (“The misogynistic tradition of the RAE has once again occupied the front page and with it, the consequences it could bring for the language”) and its slowness (“the sluggish progress reflected its slow internal regeneration”). About the three academics it was added:

[...] None of them wins the merit of changing the Academy from within, but they admit to having planted a seed among their male colleagues. Although their priorities vary, they do not complain about Ana Maria Matute’s male replacement because all agree that the RAE is moving towards parity without any impositions. But there is a change which to them does seem imperative: to eliminate the misogynistic heritage of words.