Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2(pesnta.1.2) 9/5/84; site scc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amd!pesnta!scc!steiny
From: steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Re: Sexless language
Message-ID: <535@scc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-Aug-85 12:21:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: scc.535
Posted: Fri Aug  2 12:21:55 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 4-Aug-85 06:22:13 EDT
References: <1173@ubc-cs.UUCP> <549@mmintl.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Don Steiny Software
Lines: 20

> 
> 
> The question is not, can there be sexism without sexist linguistic
> constructions?  The answer to that is obviously yes.  The question is,
> can sexism be eliminated while retaining sexist constructions?

Good point.  The Chinese language does not have gender.  For 
instance, "husband" and "wife" are both "ai ren" ("loved one").

The Chinese are pretty sexist regardless of the lack of grammatical
distinctions for sexes.

A linguistics professor I once had said "language isn't sexist,
people are."

-- 
scc!steiny
Don Steiny @ Don Steiny Software
109 Torrey Pine Terrace
Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060