home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!munnari.oz.au!manuel.anu.edu.au!huxley!tal691
- From: tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au (Tonio Loewald)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
- Subject: Re: Sexist Pronouns
- Date: 26 Jan 93 11:10:21 GMT
- Organization: Australian National University
- Lines: 32
- Message-ID: <tal691.728046621@huxley>
- References: <1993Jan19.023418.8914@news.media.mit.edu> <freek.727449378@groucho.phil.ruu.nl> <1993Jan21.144844.1@tesla.njit.edu> <1993Jan23.111911.10741@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.2.12
-
- jelmore@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Elmore) writes:
-
- >Amen to _that_ sentiment. I'm a journalism major, and one of the regular
- >discussions that pops up is non-sexist vs. gender-neutral language.
- >(BTW, try using "letter carrier", "fire fighter", and "police officer".
- >Work wonders.)
-
- >The only time I've _ever_ seen these supposed gender-neutral pronouns in
- >regular use is in a comic book (DOOM PATROL, and the character in question
- >was a hermaphrodite.) That's it.
-
- A bit of creativity doesn't help, but there are still quite a few glaring
- problems, notably he/she, his/her, him/her. My solution -- unsatisfactory
- but I think effective -- is to say he/she, him/her, or whatever it is,
- exactly, I wish to say. Sure, it may grate compared to the age old
- chesnut of disclaiming "he" as meaning "he or she but I just wanted
- my prose to be sweeter." However many thousand years of entrenched
- sexism and women earning 65c in the dollar or whatever probably grates
- at least as much.
-
- Then there's words like "actor" and "master". Does a woman "mistress"
- the flute? I don't think so. Homey don't play that.
-
- BTW -- isn't there a special place to debate this stuff somewhere?
-
- Tonio
-
- --
- Tonio Loewald | tal691@huxley.anu.edu.au
-
- "Yes!! For the hundred and fiftieth time!
- We're burning in hell!!!" (John Callahan)
-