Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site rtech.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!amdahl!rtech!jeff
From: jeff@rtech.UUCP (Jeff Lichtman)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: \"Guys\" is to \"<?>\" as ...
Message-ID: <630@rtech.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 6-Sep-85 02:12:23 EDT
Article-I.D.: rtech.630
Posted: Fri Sep  6 02:12:23 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 8-Sep-85 11:32:05 EDT
References: <305@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: Relational Technology, Alameda CA
Lines: 22

> P.S.:  Don't be fooled into thinking that "gal" is a good match for "guy."
> "Gal" is just another way of saying "girl," so it is just as unacceptable.
> 
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
> :: Jym Dyer :: {allegra|decvax|ihnp4}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer ::
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

I disagree.  It's true that "gal" is derived from "girl", but I don't think
that the average person makes this connection when using or hearing the
word.  It's like saying that the word "sinister" favors discrimination against
left-handed people.

The word "girl" calls up a mental image of an immature person who doesn't
deserve the respect normally given to adults.  The word "gal" doesn't do
this (at least, not for me).  Please remember that etymology is not the same
as meaning.
-- 
Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.)
aka Swazoo Koolak

{amdahl, sun}!rtech!jeff
{ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!jeff