In the mini-essay “Words Matter: How Language Influences Inclusion,” Odessa S. Hamilton points out that language is not only a means of communication but also a powerful force that can shape social realities and biases, and can positively or negatively affect opportunities, inclusiveness, and respect delivered to certain individuals in professional and everyday settings. Hamilton supports this claim by using emotional appeals, logical reasoning, and vivid contrasts. She states, “Label something beautiful…you render it special… Label something ugly… you render it unworthy,” illustrating the power of language through emotional imagery. She uses logical appeals to emphasize consequences of real scenarios: “Inclusive language has the potential to increase individual and team objectivity, leading to stronger decision-making.” Additionally, she criticizes common gender-biased language patterns, stating, “We call grown women ‘girls’ and boys ‘young men,’” to expose how language subtly upholds harmful gender roles. Writing in a professional yet urgent tone, Hamilton addresses her essay primarily towards business leaders and then the general public to advocate for intentional language use that supports equity, dignity, and inclusivity in diverse environments.

Hamilton emphasizes the emotional power of language through the quote “label something beautiful, and you acknowledge its uniqueness, elevate its value, and bestow upon it influence… label something ugly… you render it unworthy, redundant, disposable.” This phrase serves as a powerful emotional appeal, showing how a single word can either have an uplifting effect and the opposite can have quite a different one. By using vivid terms such as “elevate” versus “nullify” and “disposable,” Hamilton appeals towards the reader’s moral and emotional instincts, urging them to reflect on how they describe others. This strategy strengthens her central argument that language doesn’t merely describe reality but actively shapes it by giving readers an internal sense of the consequences. It also resonates with a large audience by calling for personal reflection and moral responsibility.

To strengthen her argument with reason, Hamilton claims that “inclusive language has the potential to increase individual and team objectivity, leading to stronger decision-making and more goal-oriented perceptions.” This use of logical reasoning appeals more towards professionals by emphasizing possible outcomes. The language shifts the idea of inclusiveness from something purely ethical to something more strategically valuable, something that is more measurable in a sense. By connecting the idea of inclusivity to performance in a work setting, Hamilton specifies the audience for her message beyond average readers to include corporate leaders and organizations. The effectiveness of this rhetorical move lies in how she is able to use practical evidence to connect abstract ideas with practical examples. Hamilton brings up the matter of a pattern of gender bias that lies within common expressions, noting that “we call grown women ‘girls’ and boys ‘young men’… and consider our preference toward words like ‘mankind’ over ‘humankind.’” This quote illustrates how repetition of gender-biased language normalizes and even brings outdated gender roles a step closer to the past that no longer is. Her observation that “such labels reinforce invalid dogmas” demonstrates how language can passively support harmful societal norms. By exposing how unnoticed yet widespread the level of the bias is, Hamilton appeals to the audience’s sense of justice and equality. This rhetorical strategy connects directly to the broader argument that language paves a way to continue belittling others and therefore must be used carefully and thoughtfully in order to support justice.