A debate over grammar has become the latest flashpoint in Italy’s wider cultural and political divide, with schools at the centre of a dispute over gender, language and parental rights.
The controversy concerns the use of the schwa (ə) and the asterisk (*) as alternatives to traditional gendered endings in Italian. The issue gained renewed attention after Education and Merit Minister Giuseppe Valditara used social media to highlight the government’s position on the matter.
In March 2025, Valditara’s ministry circulated guidance to schools advising against the use of the schwa and asterisk in official documents. The measure followed opinions issued by the Accademia della Crusca, Italy’s leading authority on the Italian language, in 2021, 2023 and 2024.
The Academy argued that the asterisk is unsuitable for official and public texts because it cannot be pronounced, while the schwa, although representing a sound found in other languages, is not a conventional Italian grapheme. The concern, according to the guidance, is that such forms could compromise the readability and accessibility of institutional communications.
The dispute, however, extends well beyond administrative language. The schwa has been adopted by some groups seeking more inclusive forms of Italian, particularly in reference to people who do not identify within the traditional male-female categories. For supporters, changing language is a way of reflecting social developments and challenging the use of the masculine plural as the default form for mixed groups.
Critics argue that these innovations amount to an ideological intervention in the Italian language and make written communication more difficult. Valditara has strongly opposed the use of both symbols, declaring that “gender-neutral grammar does not exist in Italian” and arguing that the symbols do not belong to the Italian language.
His position has received support from parties in the governing coalition. Fratelli d’Italia has defended the historical structure of Italian, while the League has described the policy as part of its opposition to what it calls “gender ideology”.
Opposition parties and sections of the education community have reacted sharply. Teacher and writer Enrico Galiano, for example, questioned whether the debate over linguistic symbols was distracting attention from more pressing problems facing Italian schools, including student anxiety, school safety and dropout rates.
The controversy has also become linked to a broader legislative battle over sex education.
On June 3, Parliament gave final approval to legislation on informed parental consent in schools. Under the new rules, schools must obtain written parental consent for activities dealing with sexual topics, while such projects are prohibited in kindergartens, primary schools and lower secondary schools, subject to ordinary biological education provided for under national curriculum guidelines.
Valditara subsequently used a photograph of a school textbook discussing masculine and feminine pronouns and the schwa to illustrate what he described as the practical consequences of the legislation.
The result is a dispute that is no longer simply about punctuation or grammar. It reflects a deeper confrontation between competing views of education and society: one side argues that language should evolve to reflect changing identities and promote inclusion; the other stresses linguistic tradition, clarity and the role of parents in determining how sensitive issues are addressed in schools.
For Italy’s education system, the challenge will be to enforce the new rules while navigating a cultural debate that shows little sign of disappearing.
