Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pasteur!agate!violet.berkeley.edu!skyler From: skyler@violet.berkeley.edu Newsgroups: comp.society.women Subject: Re: Language in a Requirements Specification Message-ID: <12900@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Date: 3 Aug 88 02:12:30 GMT Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU Lines: 120 Approved: skyler@violet.berkeley.edu (Moderator -- Trish Roberts) Comments-to: comp-women-request@cs.purdue.edu Submissions-to: comp-women@cs.purdue.edu In-Reply-To:<12781@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Here are a variety of responses to the following query: > At the present time, I am writing a Requirements Specification for a > new software product. The spec is getting rather voluminous, and during > the course of making references to Users, I have been using the pronouns > "him" and "his" as generics. I think that it is possible, and not incredibly difficult, to eliminate gender pronouns in writing. One method is heavy use of passive voice in the writing (which I don't reccomend, since that usually makes the writings painfully boring, even if they weren't that way to begin with). Another is to pretend that "their", "they", etc., are singular pronouns, which is probably acceptable in a technical document, although an English scholar would cringe at it. A third choice is to use "they", "their", etc., in their natural, plural habitat. This works fairly well. A final choice is to alternate between male and female gender pronouns as often as you can without creating illogical sentences like: "First, the user should insert the floppy into her computer's drive, then power on his computer." Used with care, this style works well, and adds variety. > If so, I will certainly take the time to re-edit the specs. If not, > I'll leave them as they are. I reccomend that you do re-edit them. There are a number of good books that tell how to avoid sexism in writing, but I don't know the references to them. I don't have the reference, but I'm sure someone here does. Steve Schonberger steve@raspail.uucp ...!uunet!rosevax!shamash!rapail!steve ========================================================================== There was a workshop at the "Women into Computing" conference where this issue came up. Basically the speaker, from the Open University - a British state-funded distance learning college - looked at the role of language in their Computer Course material. The outcomes were:- 1 "He" and "his" exclude half your audience. 2 "he/she" or "he or she" are ugly constructs and spoil the flow of the text. 3 Using he in some sections and she in others seems to be the most acceptable. Also remember to use she to describe senior staff, not just he. Hope that helps David England -- Dave uucp(Europe): ...!mcvax!ukc!dcl-cs!de uucp(Atlantic): ...!uunet!comp.lancs.ac.uk!de arpa/janet: de@comp.lancs.ac.uk "What an embezel ! What an ultra maroon !" ============================================================================ > My simple question is: is this acceptable? A simple answer: NO. A simple solution: ??????? As a former English teacher who now writes and documents software, I am keenly aware of the problem. I think that the masculine pronouns may no longer respectably parade about as "generics". Too many people take (proper) offense. But constantly saying she/he, his/hers is ugly and distracting. (Is it sexist to put his before hers? Should we count and balance his/hers, hers/his?). Inventing new gender-neutral pronouns has been tried and ignored or laughed to scorn. Usually, what I do is to replace all masculine "generics" with feminine pronouns, just to see if anyone notices (and as my contribution to gender affirmative action). If anyone complains, I just tell her (note the example!) that for the next 1,500 years feminine pronouns are to be considered generic in order to balance that last 1,500 years of English gender imbalance. (Just kidding!!!!!!?) Steve Price pacbell!pbhyf!rsp (415) 823-1951 ====================================================================== In a recent book I saw the following example. In a sentence (presumably the first such in the chapter) beginning, "First, a leader identifies himself..." the word "himself" is followed by an asterisk, leading the reader to this note at the bottom of the page: "Throughout this chapter, masculine pronouns denote a person of either sex." This allows all the convenience of traditional usage while indicating that one has thought about the matter or at least is aware that it is an issue. As for discomfort, I find the use of FEMININE generic pronouns disquieting. I can understand why people want to use a generic "she" but unless one is writing on language or on feminist topics, this usage is jarring. In fact, it's generally intended to be. To contravene conventional usage is sometimes useful and often thought-provoking, and should always be done carefully and appropriately. When I see a generic "she" I always think of a woman, and while there certainly are lots of female managers, programmers, writers, etc., if I don't need to know an individual's sex, having my attention drawn to it in, say, a book on programming only detracts from the author's purpose. It's one of those things that call attention to themselves, rather like bad grammar or spelling. As for "he or she," "his or her," etc., some of that is fine, but too much is awkward. And as for "s/he," if you can't say it, don't write it. It's one of those things like "and/or" that are closer to computer-manual format than to real English. --Marc Sacks ======================================================================= [Many good writers have used "they" as the indefinite singular-- Addison, Austen, Fielding, Chesterfield, Ruskin, and Scott, for example. Such grammarians as Alexander Bain (1879), Henry Sweet (1891), and, to a lesser extent, Jesperson (1922) support it as well. For more on this, see the chapter entitled "The Word That Failed" in Dennis Baron's _Grammar and Gender_.]