Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!olivea!apple!hercules!gilham From: gilham@csl.sri.com (Fred Gilham) Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc Subject: Re: The nature of wizards Message-ID: Date: 12 Oct 90 19:24:01 GMT References: <1990Oct2.010645.10743@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <270897A8.6F6C@tct.uucp> <1990Oct3.024824.13060@eng.umd.edu> <270B296A.17D3@tct.uucp> <3975@viper.Lynx.MN.Org> Sender: usenet@csl.sri.com Organization: Computer Science Lab, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA. Lines: 34 In-reply-to: dave@viper.Lynx.MN.Org's message of 11 Oct 90 14:59:20 GMT David Messer writes: ---------------------------------------- > >>Why do you use 'she'? > >A better question is, "Why not?" To which the answer is: "To avoid confusing the reader by using a gender-specific pronoun where proper English usage is to use a gender-unspecified pronoun, namely 'he.'" This is a a good example of the damage caused by trying to change the language to suit a political adgenda -- here we are totally sidetracked from the point you made about wizards. ---------------------------------------- I've always thought the best solution was to use something like the English do when they refer to children etc.: it. As in ``A true wizard is not only well-informed and experienced. It is also gracious and generous. It patiently answers questions that lesser....'' If people say it (`it', that is) often enough, the ear will adapt. Much more literary than he/she, (s)he, or whatever. Much less distracting than `he' to feminists or `she' to non-feminists. This discussion is getting awfully miscelleneous, though. -- Fred Gilham gilham@csl.sri.com I am professionally trained only in computer science, which is to say (in all seriousness) that I am extremely poorly educated. --Joseph Wiezenbaum