Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tektronix.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!paulh
From: paulh@tektronix.UUCP (Paul Hoefling)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: gender terms
Message-ID: <5259@tektronix.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 29-Mar-85 14:50:42 EST
Article-I.D.: tektroni.5259
Posted: Fri Mar 29 14:50:42 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 31-Mar-85 04:08:03 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 32


> One cannot use an offensive word and not intend to bother someone.
> An inoffensive word (girl) is another matter though.
> 
> I pulled out my old trusty Websters to find out the generally accepted
> meanings of the words in question:
> 
> GIRL: (1)-A single or married women of any age.
>  I see nothing offensive here. I will continue to use the term when
>  referring to someone meeting the definition.
> 
> N*gger: (1)-Negro, usually taken to be offensive.
>  I rest my case. The use of this term is socially unacceptable.

The word N*gger has come to be socially unacceptable because Blacks objected
to it.  You are not allowing women the same privilege, i.e. to make a term found
offensive into one that is socially unacceptable.

The whole point is that it is *not* the person who uses the term that determines
whether or not it is offensive, but rather the person to whom the term is
applied.

Just another incarnation of the Golden Rule:  If you want people to call you
what you prefer to be called, call them what *they* prefer to be called.

Your "old trusty Websters" is exactly that: *old*.  If you look in a more
modern dictionary, you might just find that the word "girl" is also listed
as offensive.  Rest your case on more solid ground.
-- 

Paul Hoefling   (...!tektronix!paulh)
Information Pack Rat