Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1     9/27/83; site hplabsc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!security!genrad!grkermit!masscomp!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!hplabsc!plaskon
From: plaskon@hplabsc.UUCP (Dawn Plaskon)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: woman's opinion on "girl"/"woman"
Message-ID: <1549@hplabsc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Dec-83 15:15:14 EST
Article-I.D.: hplabsc.1549
Posted: Wed Dec 14 15:15:14 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 17-Dec-83 01:49:39 EST
References: <1497@tekig1.UUCP>, <307@iheds.UUCP> <6771@arizona.UUCP> <614@ut-sally.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett Packard Labs, Palo Alto CA
Lines: 16


I think the reference is valid, as the only use of girl rather than 
woman that would offend me is the instance of a manager "having his
girl do it". THat is not, of course, the only way that girl can be
used but is the clearest example of a mindset about women and their
place which is offensive.  The manager above is not deliberately
trying to degrade his secretary, and, in fact, probably values her
highly, but he has a conception of a woman's place and capabilities
which is degrading.  This should change over the course of time as
new generations grow up with the examples of women who are successful
and competent in the world beyond the home.  Being angry at the use
of girl is correct in some instances and not in others and one must
simply use one's own judgment to decide whether the unspoken intent
is inappropriate to the situation.  Even then displaying anger will
not resolve the situation, while calmly stating "I am a woman, not 
a girl" might just set the other person to thinking.