Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!munnari!bruce!labtam!foster!cbp
From: cbp@foster.avid.OZ (Cameron Paine)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: sexist language
Summary: Restructure the sentence...
Message-ID: <140@foster.avid.OZ>
Date: 22 Nov 88 13:48:38 GMT
References: <17573@adm.BRL.MIL>
Organization: Avid Systems Pty Ltd, Australia
Lines: 51

In article <17573@adm.BRL.MIL>, rbj@nav.icst.nbs.gov (Root Boy Jim) writes:
> One of the changes I would like to see is actually a technical violation
> of grammar, but sounds ok to me:

Allow me to summarise the discussion so far. Opinion seems to be divided
between:

 * Hack at the grammar (as Jim suggests above).

 * Excise any reference to [a-z]man[a-z] from the language; contrive new(tered)
   words where necessary.

 * Ignore the issue - what's all the fuss about anyway?  ;-)

 * Work with what we've got; apply some thought to our writing.

I prefer the last option.

> "If a user deletes all HIS files" -> "If a user deletes all THEIR files"

Could this not be expressed as:

	If the owner of the files deletes them...

	If the files are deleted by their owner...

	If the files belonging to a user are deleted...

	If a user's files are deleted...

	If all the files are deleted...

The most suitable clause will depend on how the sentence is to be completed and
whether on not `the user' or `the files' are the subject of the sentence.

As an aside, the active voice is often more appropriate. In this situation, it
makes the statement more direct and neatly resolves the gender problem.

Consider:

	If you delete your files...


	...you're in deep sh*t because we don't have a backup.  :-D

cbp
-- 

cbp@foster.avid.oz - {ACS,CS}net
cbp%foster.oz.au@uunet.uu.net - ARPAnet
...!{hplabs,mcvax,nttlab,ukc,uunet}!munnari!foster.oz.au!cbp - UUCP
D