Re: Gender bias (was Evolving language or laziness)

Subject: Re: Gender bias (was Evolving language or laziness)
From: Mike Stiles <mstiles -at- CYMBAL -dot- AIX -dot- CALPOLY -dot- EDU>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 12:07:20 -0800

This is going way, way off topic, but:

On Mon, 18 Mar 1996, Tim Altom wrote:

> My whole point is that even language that gives offense to a minority is
> not, ipso facto, wrong, ill-advised or subject to immediate change. There
> are always subunits of society that are put off by actions or language of
> the majority, but that is not, by itself, a reason to change anything.

Actions, Tim? You mean sitting in the back of the bus? Separate
drinking fountains? I can see that some "subunits" of our society
might be "put off" by those. I'm sorry, there ARE reasons to change some
things, including the generic pronoun he.

Mike Stiles
mstiles -at- calpoly -dot- edu


Previous by Author: WANT: multiple-GIF viewing tool, WWW lists
Next by Author: How do you use e-mail in the editing process?
Previous by Thread: Re: Gender bias (was Evolving language or laziness)
Next by Thread: Re: Gender bias (was Evolving language or laziness)


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

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads