Re: Gender in language

From: bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz (Bruce Sinclair)

Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2002 01:01:01 +0000

In article <slrnat51go.8u1.spam@ts1.alberni.net>, spam@nospam.com.invalid wrote:
>In article <vohvg316a6e.fsf@blue3.math.berkeley.edu>, David desJardins wrote:
>>
>> The motivation to call both men and women "actors" is to avoid
>> distinguishing between them in situations where there is no reason to
>> distinguish between them.  Making such distinctions facilitates and
>> supports discrimination, so some people are against it.
>
>I don't think making the distinction facilitates discrimination at all.
>I've always found the argument questionable, since no one ever actually
>produces much in the way of compelling evidence that calling someone "mail
>man" or "mail lady" aids in discrimination.  Since we are a species with two
>genders, it seems rational that language would reflect this fact.

Shall we point out the real stupidity here ... what shall we replace this
with ...

Human   - huperson ? ... nope. Son is sexist ... so it will have to be
huperchild. Likewise perchild and woperchild ... Silly enough for you ? :)

The drive to get rid of 'sexist' language has people talking to chairs.
Silly enough yet ? :)

Personally I call actors actors because I don't like the word actresses - to
me it's clumsy. Does it make any real difference ? ... probably not. Will we
have any say about what happens to the language ? ... probably not :)

Bruce

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Oook !
NOTE remove the not_ from the address to reply. NO SPAM !

References

Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:10:15 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:36:24 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:41:55 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 01:53:44 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Wed, 13 Nov 2002 10:22:49 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Wed, 13 Nov 2002 17:03:30 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 07:07:58 +0000
Re: Gender in language
madcentral@aol.com (MadCentral)
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 10:48:57 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 20:07:46 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:37:13 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 01:43:18 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 02:16:22 +0000

Referenced By

Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 18:10:15 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 19:36:24 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:41:55 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 01:53:44 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Wed, 13 Nov 2002 10:22:49 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Wed, 13 Nov 2002 17:03:30 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 07:07:58 +0000
Re: Gender in language
madcentral@aol.com (MadCentral)
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 10:48:57 +0000
Re: Gender in language
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Mon, 11 Nov 2002 20:07:46 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:37:13 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 01:43:18 +0000
Re: Gender in language
AC <spam@nospam.com.invalid>
Tue, 12 Nov 2002 02:16:22 +0000