Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!oliveb!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpfcla!bct
From: bct@hpfcla.UUCP (bct)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <72200001@hpfclq.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Jul-85 15:12:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: hpfclq.72200001
Posted: Fri Jul 19 15:12:00 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jul-85 23:41:50 EDT
References: <520@leadsv.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard - Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 23
Nf-ID: #R:leadsv:520:hpfclq:72200001:37777777600:1077
Nf-From: hpfclq!bct    Jul 19 11:12:00 1985


Discrimination is often in the eye of the beholder. As a man of the
'80s, I am confident I judge people on the basis of their actions;
not by their rhetoric, sex, color, age, etcetera. It is noteworthy
that this confidence was established only after much effort on my part
to be more open minded and conscientious about other people's cultural
backgrounds and points of view.

So it is with confidence that I say to you now. What does it matter if
our language uses generic names like 'mankind' to refer to all of
humanity? I do not see this as excluding women. Why should women take
offense when I mean none? Why change the accepted meaning of such terms
as 'he', when used in their generic sense?

It seems to me we should be beyond such trivial pursuits. We should be
moving onward towards a more enlightened attitude, wherein each person
(be it man or woman) does not look for prejudice where there is none
intended. Instead, spend your effort seeking out justice where it is
in fact needed. A rose is, after all, a rose by any name.

					Just a possiblity,

					Taylor