Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site druxo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!drutx!druxo!nap
From: nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: A Small Victory; Not at All
Message-ID: <841@druxo.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Apr-85 09:14:48 EST
Article-I.D.: druxo.841
Posted: Wed Apr  3 09:14:48 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Apr-85 06:04:47 EST
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Denver
Lines: 54

Marcel:
> By changing the language, are you not attacking the symptom rather than the
> cause? 

Nancy Parsons:
No.  "...a language is not merely a means of communication; it is also an
expression of shared assumptions.  Language transmits values and behavioral
models to all those people who use it."  (From the preface of "Words and
Women" by Casey Miller and Kate Swift.)  I agree with this opinion, and
therefore disagree that language is merely a symtom.

> As I said, it is always possible to express oneself gender-neutrally.
> The failure of a speaker or writer to do so is an indication of
> laziness and/or unclear thinking.

Agreed.  But many (most?) people are lazy and/or think unclearly.  I, for
one, have little hope for this to change much.  But I know that language
changes constantly.

>                                    Why penalize the already
> much-abused language for its users' faults?

The phrase "penalize a language" doesn't convey much to me.  I'm concerned
about changing people's attitudes toward women more than maintaining a
language that changes constantly anyway.

>         ...One does not have to use 'he' or 'she' if the sex of the person
> one is speaking of is not known, or is irrelevant. 'One' does the job
> very well. One can also rewrite the sentence so a pronoun is not required.

True enough.  But this, too, results in some awkwardness.  In fact, I tend
to think that the only "satisfactory" (in my opinion) solution will be a
combination of uses of "one," of "she or he," of singular "they," and
rewriting to avoid pronouns, depending on what is most "comfortable."

>         ...With so much left to do, why should we waste our time on
> trivial or counterproductive pursuits?  Why not instead work toward
> goals that will make a difference: the universal availability of
> quality, affordable day care; the narrowing of the gap between women's
> and men's wages; the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment; and so
> many others. If we reach or get sufficiently close to these goals,
> sexism in the language will not be an issue. Languages are not sexist,
> people are (What a cliche!! Sorry about that)

I'm sure you realize that this is an opinion with which I disagree.  I
believe that language is a strong factor in maintaining attitudes that
interfere with all of these other efforts.

>                                ...Mine is an emotional response.

I'm glad we got that straight! :-)

Nancy Parsons
AT&T ISL