Virginia Elected a Woman Governor. The State Constitution Still Says ‘He’

Virginia has its first woman governor, but its constitution still describes the office as a man’s job.

Abigail Spanberger’s election last year renewed attention to outdated laws governing voting rights, campaign finance safeguards, and the K-12 funding formula. But after her election and 11 eventful months in state politics, there has been no notable effort to address them, especially compared with other states.

Joan Porte, president of the League of Women Voters of Virginia, said the state Constitution should be revised accordingly.

“It’s important for Virginia to catch up with the times,” said Porte. “We’ve been behind the times on so many things, and I just think it’s important that this language be updated and become gender-neutral, and go with the flow, go with the time.”

Virginia’s constitution includes gender-specific references to the governor, including “he shall hold office” and “he shall communicate to the General Assembly.” Masculine pronouns appear throughout the language describing the office and its responsibilities.

A similar issue surfaced in Maine when the state elected its first female governor, Janet Mills, in 2018.

Maine passed a bill in 2019 to remove gendered pronouns from references to the governor and chief justice, replacing them with wording focused on the office — for example, repeating “the chief justice” instead of using “he” or “him.”

The bill also directed Maine’s Office of the Revisor of Statutes — responsible for preparing, editing, organizing and publishing the state’s laws — to plan updates across the state’s other statutory titles. At the time, staff estimated it could take 10 to12 years to review all 40 titles.

Maine’s lesson

Maine House Majority Leader Matt Mooman said he was glad the measure passed unanimously without political theatrics, adding that it was “awesome” to see people from both parties agree that Maine’s laws should recognize women leaders.

“It’s important for all people to see themselves in their government,” Mooman said. “To recognize that they can participate in their government, their government will care about them, listen to what they have to say, and that they too can serve in those roles if they want to someday.”

Mooman said one lesson from the process was that the phrase “gender neutral” confused some people. Clearer language, such as “updating laws so they don’t assume everyone is a man,” may better communicate the change.

Lawmakers also recognized that updating every statute would require much more staff work, so it made sense to phase the work into the revisor’s regular schedule.

Overall, he viewed the change as a small but meaningful way to help people see themselves in government.

Public support is key, study shows

Efforts to make state constitutions gender-neutral cut across party lines and raise a broader question about how states describe public office.

In 2018, South Dakota elected its first woman governor, Republican Kristi Noem, who pushed to change male references to the governor in the state Constitution. However, after lawmakers passed the amendment, residents rejected it in November 2024.

Researchers later examined how information about South Dakota’s proposed 2023 constitutional amendment to replace male-specific pronouns with gender-neutral language affected public reaction.

The results showed that public support for a gender-neutral constitutional language may depend significantly on how the change is explained.

Using a survey of 727 registered voters, researchers found that Republicans were generally less supportive than other political groups, primarily because of preconceived notions about gender-neutral language and pronouns.

Those views included arguments among conservatives that the measure is an attempt to advance LGBTQ+ or nonbinary gender policies, as well as discomfort with nonbinary pronouns.

However, explaining the amendment’s purpose increased support, particularly among women, independents, and Republicans.

What’s next

Spanberger’s administration has not publicly stated its stance on the matter, and no legislation proposing a gender-neutral constitutional amendment has been introduced.

The closest measure was introduced by Del. David Reid, D-Loudoun, in 2019 and successfully reintroduced in 2020, amending the state law to recognize “chairwoman,” “chair,” “chairperson,” and “chair-at-large,” in addition to “chairman,” as legally permissible titles for the head of a county board.

Also in 2020, Del. Marcus Simon, D-Fairfax, introduced a successful measure to replace gender-specific terms such as “husband” and “wife” with gender-neutral terminology in the state code.

By Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury

Virginia Mercury is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Virginia Mercury maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Samantha Willis for questions: info@virginiamercury.com.