From: hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain)
Subject: Re: The "his", "he" Issue
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 20:59:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.202143.18242@anasazi.com>, best@anasazi.com (Mike Best) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Aug19.081735.8761@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug18.085217.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu> mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
> >>  Using the male form as the neutered form _includes_, not excludes, the
> >>female gender. Why not change the neutral form to "she?"  Why change it in the
> >>first place?  Our language has evvolved in this way -- let it stand.  There's
> >>no particularly good reason to change it (Sherheryar thinking it would be cute
> >>doesn't qualify as a good reason).
> >
> >Let's see.  I once read an article which said something to the effect
> >that, "Like all other mammals, man breastfeeds his young."  Now, given
> >that the chances of a man breastfeeding his young are very small, is
> >this the proper use of the generic masculine?  If breastfeeding is a
> >distinctly female trait but it's still legit to use generic masculines
> >when talking about it, is it equally legit to talk of his pregnancy or
> >his uterus? 
> >
> Don't stop there, a Hysterectomy should become a Hersterectomy.
> See?  This is what is at stake, the decline of the English language.
> The foolishness of following social whims to define the language is
> what we are debating and allowing minority special interest groups 
> such as feminists define our language is far from acceptable.

Acceptable to whom?  To people in general or only to white men (no offense)?
And when you say "allowing" in the above context, who allows whom?  Are you
basically implying that "special interest" groups (I love that phrase since
it has a "non person" ring to it) are not part of the general community?
Or that they are "less equal than others"? This point illustrates a grave
problem with the current democratic structure.
 And on your earlier point, 
the his/her issue has nothing to do with hysterectomy or history. Those are
words with precise meanings where as when someone says "his" most people
invision a man.  
> 
> I don't have any problem with the use of "she" or "her" except where it
> makes the language less precise.  If the use is clumsy or awkward I don't
> want to see it used, and this can be the case simply due to our culture.
> You may night like it but there are many cases where the use of "she"
> just sounds awful, and yes this is a cultural result since we are brought
> up hearing phrases and reading books which use the same phraseology.

When you change "he" to "he or she", you are making the language "more 
precise."  And lets not use words just because they sound good! A language
is only worth what it communicates.  If it says he when it means he and she, 
there is a problem.  And cultures change!
 
> People who use the female gender instead of the traditional male gender
> are denying their culture, purposely confusing the issue, and are 
> considered to be fringe activists.  In my opinion only of course ;)

In my opinion people who use the female gender instead of the male are
trying to "change" culture from sexist to a little less sexist.  Language
and communication plays an essential role in cultural change.
> 
> 
> She....Her....yar.  :)