From: utzoo!watmath!watarts!bernie
Newsgroups: net.women
Title: Re: Genderless pronouns and non-sexist writing
Article-I.D.: watarts.1811
Posted: Wed May  4 11:04:43 1983
Received: Wed May  4 23:44:15 1983
Reply-To: bernie@watarts.uucp (Bernie Roehl)
References: flairvax.121

The question of whether there is a 'natural and widely-felt need' for neuter
pronouns is interesting.  Michael Ellis contends that there is, else why would
we be discussing it on the net at such great length.  However, there is as yet
no clear concensus as to whether those pronouns are good or bad; this suggests
that the need is *not* 'natural and widely-felt'.  After all, we're discussing
ABM systems in net.space and abortion in several (perhaps too many?) newsgroups;
the fact that things are being discussed does not mean there is an agreement
on the issue.  The fact that no one posting articles to the net has used a
neuter pronoun suggests that, at least for the present, there is no natural or
widely-felt need for their use.  As I said in my previous article, language
does not evolve in a particular direction simply because people feel it ought
to.
				--Bernie Roehl
				...decvax!watmath!watarts!bernie