Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site uicsl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uicsl!preece
From: preece@uicsl.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: language reform (ad naseum) - (nf)
Message-ID: <16400057@uicsl.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 28-Apr-84 05:53:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: uicsl.16400057
Posted: Sat Apr 28 05:53:00 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 30-Apr-84 00:49:59 EDT
References: <7594@watmath.UUCP>
Lines: 20
Nf-ID: #R:watmath:-759400:uicsl:16400057:000:861
Nf-From: uicsl!preece    Apr 28 10:53:00 1984

#R:watmath:-759400:uicsl:16400057:000:861
uicsl!preece    Apr 28 10:53:00 1984

NEEDLESS TO SAY, I didn't mean to say it was "sloppy to not avoid
gender neutrality in writing."  Someday I'm going to learn to read
what I write after I write it and not assume that what I wrote was
what I was thinking...

I strongly believe in gender neutrality in writing; in reviewing a
chapter for a major annual review volume I recently flagged several
instance that could be easily recast to avoid the use of the generic
masculine (the chapter was by a reasonably prominent Unix person who,
I'm sure, had no intention to insult).  On the other hand, I wouldn't
want to do unnecessary violence to the language, either.  I like
English, it's a very rich medium for expressing oneself.  Reasonable
care can usually arrive at a way of expressing an idea without using
gender specific language.

scott preece
ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!preece	<- fairly new address