Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site ssc-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!ssc-vax!ginger
From: ginger@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ginger Grover)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Genderfree terms in language
Message-ID: <428@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Aug-83 17:22:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: ssc-vax.428
Posted: Wed Aug 17 17:22:37 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Aug-83 22:32:47 EDT
Organization: Boeing Aerospace, Seattle
Lines: 26

Language *reflects* attitudes, it doesn't cause them.   Attitudes
and  stereo  types  need  to  be changed first or a change in the
language is  meaningless.   "Person"  is  often  assumed  by  the
unthinking  to  be  just the current popular term for "woman" in-
stead of the correct term for "man or woman" (or child, for  that
matter).   The  underlying reasoning appears to be "Okay guys, we
gotta call the women "persons" now or they'll  get  mad  at  us".
The  attitude here seems to be "Fer chrissake, give 'em what they
want so they'll leave us alone!  We're gonna miss  the  kickoff!"
:-)  Every woman knows the best time to sue for important conces-
sions [other than the "afterglow"], is during Monday Night  Foot-
ball. :-)

I understand what some of the other women mean when they say that
the  standard  accepted  usage can make them feel nonexistant.  I
would rather be called "woman", with all the dignity and  respect
that  title owns, than be called "person" and still be discounted
and disregarded.  Women have  long  been  annoyed  by  this,  the
difference now is that they are speaking up and saying "Damitall,
I DO exist!  Acknowledge me!"  :-)  And if you men feel  confused
by  the  *apparent*  hostility, allow me to remind you that women
have always known that mock aggression is the surest way to get a
man's attention.  :-)

                                        Ginger Grover
                                        ssc-vax!ginger