Re: Sex,Gender,Etc.

Subject: Re: Sex,Gender,Etc.
From: Lissa Story <lstory -at- INTERNET -dot- KRONOS -dot- COM>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 1994 10:52:00 EST

I disagree with Steve Owen's comment that the current line
of discourse is inappropriate for a tech writer's list.

My reasons include:

- Gender issues in writing are considered appropriate
topics for classes in my tech writing master's
program at Northeastern University. (If it it's good
enough for them, it's good enough for us. ;))

- I've only been a tech writer for a year and I
occasionally wonder if my career change was a good
one. I was pleased to see that other writers had read
the same book I had (Deborah Tannen's "You Just Don't
Understand") and that they were interested in
discussing the issues the book raised.

- I find this topic to be the most interesting since I
subscribed to the list several months ago.

I also disagree with Steve's comment that there is not a
causal relationship between the techiness of documentation
and the number of women in the field.

My reasons:

- One thing I was taught in the gender discussions in
my classes is not to use language that leaves out
part of my audience. For example, sports analogies.
Exclusive language doesn't help your audience, and it
may alienate them. (Alienation contributes to fewer
women in the field.)

- I'm a woman who is interested in reading about
computers and who is professionally involved with
computers. Yet I am regularly discouraged from
learning more about them and getting more involved in
the field by language that is too techie and too
sexist. (What does that say about members of an
audience that may be less motivated than I am?)

Lissa Story
lstory -at- internet -dot- kronos -dot- com


Previous by Author: SGML and HTML
Next by Author: Re: Words Into Type--4th ed.
Previous by Thread: Sex,Gender,Etc.
Next by Thread: Re: Sex,Gender,Etc.


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads