Xref: utzoo comp.unix.wizards:12400 sci.lang:3329
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards,sci.lang
Subject: Re: sexist language
Message-ID: <8883@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 14 Nov 88 09:49:11 GMT
References: <1460@ucsfcca.ucsf.edu> <698@packard.UUCP> <1988Nov9.200939.6069@utzoo.uucp> <10837@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> <1988Nov13.202622.23562@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Followup-To: sci.lang
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 35

In article <1988Nov13.202622.23562@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> woods@gpu.utcs.Toronto.EDU (Greg Woods) writes:
>I think we can do quite well without massive and abrupt change.  We can
>simply continue the gradual evolution of the language:  beginning to use
>'he/she' where required, or else a random mix of 'he' and 'she; eventual
>dropping of the 'ess' from various words like 'steward' and 'actor';
>gradually switching to less obviously connotated words such as changing
>'alderman' to 'councelor' where nearly equivalent terms exist, and
>especially in new situations; as well as education about language and
>its history.  These changes are already well on a roll, and have been
>for quite some time (at least in Canadian schools).

In English as it existed before the recent politicization of the language,
there were two genders, masculine and feminine.  Unlike Latin and some
other languages, English has no separate neutral gender.  In cases where
neutral gender would be appropriate, it has long been an explicit rule of
the English language that the masculine form be used.  It could just as
well have been the feminine gender but it wasn't.  Some uniform choice
was needed and made so long ago as to almost be prehistory.  Even female
writers of English literature followed this rule without complaint.

If anything, you could say that this rule discriminates against males,
because in some cases it can be difficult to tell whether "he" refers to
a person explicitly male or just to a generic person, whereas "she"
always unambiguously indicates a female.  To say that the rule in any
way reflects unfavorably on females would be ludicrous were it not for
the adverse effect on readability that this widespread belief is now
having.

If you think English is bad, I advise you to steer clear of Spanish,
where even inanimate objects are either masculine or feminine.

Folks, it really doesn't matter so long as the rules are consistently
applied, to maximize readability.  By messing around with the language
in a blatant attempt to foist political ideas on the general public,
a severe disservice to the English-speaking population is being done.