TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Male/Female thread From:Mark I Halpern <Mark_Halpern -at- SMTPGATE -dot- TESSERACT -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 18 Nov 1996 09:31:10 PST
You have brightened my day, and made me start a Monday morning
thinking that there may be hope yet for the human race, and that it
may be worthwhile facing another week among them.
I too have wondered why anyone is offended by our calling "male" and
"female" those pieces of mechanical equipment that bear obvious
analogies to our own equipment. As you ask, how does that degrade
My theory as to why people keep coming up with new things to be
offended by, and "sensitive" to, is that it's the modern form of
one-upsmanship. We have all been trained to think of showing off our
wealth as vulgar, so in our quest for personal distinction, we've
entered the Sensitivity Sweepstakes -- I'm more sensitive than you!
I've raised myself to a higher spiritual plane than yours! I'm
offended, on others' behalf, by things they haven't even decided to be
offended by themselves!
It's what Thorstein Veblen would have called "conspicuous
compunction." To hell with it.
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Male/Female thread
Author: Tammy Hale <tammyh -at- FGM -dot- COM> at INET
Date: 11/18/96 8:33 AM
I try to be sensitive to my audience, but I cannot
figure out for the life of me how the Male/Female
terminology could offend. It's logical and intuitive
because it's based on how our own equipment works.
I don't infer any kind of statement on gender roles
from its use.
Can someone explain why we should avoid using
this terminology? I haven't kept up with the "killer
language" thread that this topic originated from, so
I apologize if I'm rehashing something that's already
been adequately hashed. Thank you.
Tammy J. Hale
tammyh -at- fgm -dot- com