HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: garvey@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (Heather Garvey)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 14 Dec 1992 01:50:19 GMT
Organization: Smith Undergraduate Lab, CWRU, Cleve. OH, 44106, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: solarium.scl.cwru.edu

roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig) writes:
>J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger) writes:
>
>>Of course, just saying 'first-year' doesn't specify which year the
>>student will graduate.
>
>Neither does "freshman"... 8-)

	Yes, it does. Freshman is a much kinder term. :) The status of
'freshman' is dependent upon the number of credits you accumulate. It
is a measure of your academic level. 'First-year' (and thus second/third/
fourth/fifth/etc.) says nothing but how long you've been there. Sometimes
that becomes an unneccessary cruelty. :) 


--
						| Heather "Moose" Garvey
	"CHAD BLUNT, the BALL carrier!"		| Biochemistry - CWRU '93
		-- The entire band after 	| <hlg@po.cwru.edu>
		   any given running play	| "Wooooooah, PIZZA!"
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
From: hayesstw@risc1.unisa.ac.za (Steve Hayes)
Subject: Re: Frosh (was Re: Sexist language (was...
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 07:18:10 GMT
Organization: University of South Africa

In article <1gntmqINNb4r@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> garvey@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (Heather Garvey) writes:

>>What word do you use to refer to male humans in general?  
>
>	Gee, I dunno...maybe I should pull out a thesaurus...no, i'll
>just try to wing it...mmmm, maybe, how about....
>
>	MM      MM      EEEEEEEEE   NN    N
>        M M    M M      EE          N N   N
>        M  M  M  M      EEEEE       N  N  N
>        M   MM   M      EE          N   N N
>        M        M      EEEEEEEEE   N    NN
>
>	SEEMS PRETTY FRICKIN' OBVIOUS TO *ME*!


I ususally use "men" inclusively, so when I want to refer specifically to 
male human beings I usually use "males" - it's usually pretty obvious form 
the context that I'm not talking about ducks, ticks or elephants. Perhaps we 
need a new noun - how about mamen and women? 


Steve Hayes, Department of Missiology & Editorial Department
Univ. of South Africa, P.O. Box 392, Pretoria, 0001 South Africa
Internet: hayesstw@risc1.unisa.ac.za
          steve.hayes@f20.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english,alt.flame.spelling
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Tenants of English
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:00:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.162635.5438@seas.gwu.edu> willson@seas.gwu.edu (Stephen R. Willson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.151519.3485@bmerh85.bnr.ca> nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal
>Nadeau) writes:
>>Or, in Humpty Dumpty fashion, does a word mean just what you want it to
>>mean, no more and no less?  And anyone who doesn"t instantly realize
>>what you mean is, of course, prejudiced.
>
>Isn't this a basic tenant of English? :-)

I don't know -- who's the landlord of English?

Ted "pitch your tenets here, boys, we'll ride at dawn" Frank

ObCollege/ObEnglishUsage/ObSpellingFlame: Usdan Cafeteria at Brandeis posted
on its bulletin board the lovely greeting: "WELCOME PERSPECTIVE STUDENTS".
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Originator: tchrist@pixel.convex.com
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:20:43 GMT
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Colorado Springs, CO
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <1992Dec14.163456.9037@hobbes.kzoo.edu> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy) writes:
>Because, after all, the use of the third person plural as an ersatz
>third person neuter singular is ungrammatical, right?  And
>awkward-sounding besides, right?

Wrong, twice.  Singular "they" is perfectly fine.   Be not deceived.

From long ago....

Posted: 2 Mar 86 23:37:15 GMT
Newsgroups: net.nlang,net.women
From: bjones@denitqm.uswest.com (Brent Jones)
Subject: Re: Density and Sexist language (was...
Followup-To: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Organization: U S WEST Information Technologies
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:41:52 GMT

In article <BzFKJz.B90@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>,
mmmirash@banshee.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) wrote:
> 
[snip]
> 
> Why doesn't "human" not convey "man" any more than "mankind" does?
> *And*, just *how* far do you propose to carry out this "reform"?
> Please propose a solution which eliminates "man", "his", etc. and
> replaces them with "truly non-sexist" words. Also, please be kind
> enough to elaborate how you propose to educate people to accept
> these new words. Not just that, please convince me how this 
> "sexless" language will eliminate prejudices.  Should you succeed in 
> such an attempt, I will gladly accept that my opinion is incorrect.
> 
>                                                     Mandar.
> 

Are you being this dense willfully? Is it really that difficult to
understand the various positions in this discussion and to think your
own position through in relation to them?

Not *one* person in this *entire* thread has said, "let's eliminate all
words that relate to specific gender." NOT ONE PERSON! NOT ONE PERSON
wants to eliminate "man" and other specific-sex referents from the
language.
WHERE ON EARTH do you get that idea? WHY ON EARTH are you so prescriptive
and insecure about your viewpoint?

The point is simple, and I fail to see how it can be so difficult to
understand. Language is a tool for communication, and the more precisely
you use language, the more effectively you communicate. I don't say
"Jim Johnson is unhappy" when I mean to impart the meaning "Everyone
is unhappy." I don't use a specific referent to identify a general group.
I don't say "Mankind is annoyed with Mandar Mirashi" unless I 
*specifically* mean all males, which is definitely not the case.

Happily, English provides me with a simple solution: If I mean all males, I
say "mankind." If I mean all females I say "womankind." If I mean all
people
I say "all people," "everyone," "humankind," etc. But perhaps that is too
precise or too logical for Mandar Mirashi. Perhaps he prefers the ambiguity
of "mankind." Perhaps he enjoys his elitist, arrogant attitude that if he 
uses an unclear, ambiguous term like this and people misunderstand, then
the
people are boneheads unable to think with the same prejudices ("contexts")
that he does. Bah.

--
Brent Jones, Lead Tech. Editor, U S WEST IT, bjones@denitqm.uswest.com
"of beautiful weeds that cannot hide from the farmer and helplessly have 
to watch the shadow of his simian stoop leave mangled flowers in its wake, 
as the monstrous darkness approaches."--V. Nabokov _Signs and Symbols_
Xref: sparky soc.college:5522 alt.usage.english:9483
From: pezzillo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Amy J. Pezzillo)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:03:55 GMT
Followup-To: soc.college
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec14.163456.9037@hobbes.kzoo.edu> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy) writes:
>gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>>
>
>Surely you mean "...if someone tells me _he's_ a freshman, I get a lot
>more information than if _he_ tells me _he's_ 'first year'..."
>
>Because, after all, the use of the third person plural as an ersatz
>third person neuter singular is ungrammatical, right?  And
>awkward-sounding besides, right?


But infinitely preferable to hearing "he" used all the time.

>And, as we all know, there's nothing sexist about someone writing "he"
>in place of "he or she."  People who have to resort to artificial,
>politically correct non-words like "first-year" and the singular "they"
>are uneducated malcontents with nothing to do, and they're making up
>problems where none exist.
>
>Right?

WRONG!!!!!  He *is * sexist when used to denote both genders, because
it indicates only ONE -- the male.  Seriously, when you hear "he," do
you EVER  think of a woman?  NO!!!  Consider the following statement:
"Every person is entitled to his right to have an abortion."  You
thought that sounded strange, because "he" automatically brought up
the image of men.  The only reason that "he" was ever
accepted as denoting everyone was because males USED to be in charge.
Well, no more baby. Women are waking up and realizing that we have a
right to be included in those non-gender neutral terms.  So we're
using TRULY gender neutral terms wherever possible, "she or he" where
appropriate, and just plain old "she" once in a while to shake you all
up.  And you know what?  I don't CARE if you don't like hearing it.  I
never liked hearing about "forefathers" and "mankind" and
"brotherhood" and feeling totally excluded by these terms either.

ajp



Newsgroups: soc.college,misc.legal
From: varhus@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Kristofor A Varhus)
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject: Re: observations (frat)
Date: 15 Dec 92 04:16:35 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec14.032648.28935@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.023741.16916@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> DSCT@db1.cc.rochester.edu (DAVID SCOTT) writes:
>For that matter, show me where I argue "freshman" should be changed.
>I've only noted that complaining that students are called "first-years"
>is far more silly than complaining that students are called "freshmen."

Here's something you and I are in total agreement on, ted.  If you want to call
people "first-year students", that's fine with me.  But I will still call them
freshmen, no matter what anyone tells me.

--
\_\_\_\_  \_\_\_\_  \_    \_  \_    \_      |     Kristofor A. Varhus 
 \_    \_  \_        \_\_  \_  \_\_  \_     |  varhus@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
  \_\_\_\_  \_\_\_\_  \_ \_ \_  \_ \_ \_    |
   \_        \_        \_  \_\_  \_  \_\_   |   University of Pennsylvania
    \_        \_\_\_\_  \_    \_  \_    \_  | Engineering and Applied Science
Xref: sparky soc.college:5603 alt.usage.english:9572
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Frosh (was Re: Sexist language (was...
Date: 16 Dec 92 00:20:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: constell.BzBsyn.9IH
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

In article <1992Dec15.161343.6867@bmerh85.bnr.ca> nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) writes:
>In article <BzABs3.37r@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
>>
>>Remember, prejudice never exists in language, but rather, in the minds
>>of people. So, when terms such as "mankind" conjure up masculine images
>>more often than female images, it is actually the PERSON who's responsible
>>for the thought. 
>
>I'm sorry, but if "mankind" evokes "man" evokes "male", that is most
>definitely a function of language.  "Man" does mean "male human", so it
>is normal that this is the image it raises.
>
Why does "man" evoke the image of a man only, and "woman" not evoke the
image of a man? After all, "woman" does contain "man". It is just that
you have learnt to associate "woman" with a woman and not a man. Now,
somewhere in your life, you learnt about the suppression of women by
men for centuries, and let this cloud your judgement about matters
totally unrelated to the hardships suffered by women. If you object
to the usage of "mankind", your argument holds for "woman" too. It
is just that you have learnt to associate these terms differently.
Learn to associate "mankind" with the human race as a whole, and
help efface your prejudice. 
 
>Now, if the word "person" evokes a male, that is purely a function of
>the hearer's own mental processes.
>

True.

>>     Waging war on language to further the equality of sexes, will serve
>>little purpose. As long as certain traits are primarily associated with
>>either sex, it is impossible to efface these distinctions in language. 
>>I commend your egalatarian efforts, but they are misdirected. Attack the
>>root cause of the problem, instead of attempting to cure its symptoms.
>>Besides, when I presented similar views last summer on a.u.e, one 
>>gentleman provided us with the example of Farsi. Farsi is a "sexless"
>>language. Yet, *men* dominated and the nature of the language did little
>>to alleviate prejudices.
>
>No one is claiming language is the sole factor, but it is a factor.
>No one wins a "war" by ignoring some battles as irrelevant . . .
>


How ridiculous can you get? What you term "battle" isn't a battle at
all. I feel pity for the poor, misguided, narrow-minded souls who let
their mind be clouded by their prejudices, when interpreting language.

   
                                                         Mandar. 
-- 
"Imagine there are no countries. It isn't hard to do. Nothing to kill or die 
 for, and no religion too. Imagine all the people living life in peace.
 You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope that some
 day you'll join us, and the world will be as one." - John Lennon.
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject: Re: Comments on F/S (was Re: Comments on G\*\*\*\* Life)
From: censtad@dion.gac.edu (Topher the Gustie)
Date: 12 Dec 92 15:01:06 -0600
Reply-To: censtad@nic.gac.edu   

In article <1992Dec11.031911.63804@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu>  writes:
> In article <1992Dec10.110032.2784@gacvx2.gac.edu>, censtad@dion.gac.edu  
(Topher
> the Gustie) writes:
> >In article <1992Dec10.142759.13000@cdf.toronto.edu>  writes:
> >> (At UofT we don't use the sexist term "Freshman" any more.)
> >
> >At Gustavus we officially use the term First-Year Students.
> >
> UUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH, why don't you all get a fucking life, any  
woman
> who is offended by such a fucking benign term is just trying to be a  
fucking
> pain in the ass, how can you all sit by idly and watch as PC destroys  
our
> language and reduces normally sane individuals into screaming  
psycopaths,  I
> am not anti-woman or for that matter anti anything but this shit just  
pisses
> me off.  A freshman is a freshman.  Sorry, I am a Upper Middle Class  
White
> Freshman Male, I don't feel guilty about it, Just drag me out in the  
street
> and shoot me now.  Y'all are impossible,  do people who work in the  
sewers get
> in through person holes?



Excuse me for typing.  Jesus H. Christ it has nothing to do with PC.  We  
changed the term to allow First-Year students to escape the "frosh" stigma  
and help them get through their first year.  Noone is making you come here  
so can it will ya?
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language)
Originator: tchrist@pixel.convex.com
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:43:08 GMT
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Colorado Springs, CO
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger):
:English does have the genderless word 'one', but very few people seem
:to use it.

If one were to delve into the matter more deeply, one might discover
that this usage sounds a bit stuffy and formal.

But anyone can use whatever they (and to a certain extent) their
listeners are most comfortable with.

I happen use both at different times.

I've heard people use "they" when the antecedent is "one" as well.

--tom
-- 
    Tom Christiansen      tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist

In English, every word can be verbed.  Would that it were so in our
programming languages.
Newsgroups: soc.college
From: Professor WHO?
Subject: Re: I'm back and badder than before
Summary: More spillage news gets answered
Originator: boyiny@kovalevskaya
Keywords: fraternities
Reply-To: yangboy@ccms.ntu.edu.tw
Organization: Ayatollah's Correct Bidding Lessons
X-Subliminal-Message: Like I care??
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 22:23:28 GMT

[Bucci:]
>Alright, I entered into this flamewar and now I am going to have either deal
>with the flamatory attacks, or reciprocate.

It would appear to this observer that you are among those who _INITIATED_
this flamefest, and that you should not be surprised at counterattacks.


>...  I acknowledged [misquoting Orwell], and apologized.  Apparently,
>people such as Professor Who? have nothing to do but beat a dead horse.

Believe me, with students to teach and a little research to do, plus my
usual favourite newsgroups (of which soc.coll isn't one) I don't have that
much time to worry about the spilled-over posts into alt.folklore.college.
I expect that by now someone would have pointed out that I may have posted
before I can see your followup, and certainly I saw no followup from you
at the time of my response.

>I guess when typing at 2 or 3 am one is bound to make a few errors, I admit to
>mine, how about the rest of you liberal, double talking, propoganda spewing,
>anti-social morons?

I wonder who that may be addressed to :-) as it certainly does not seem to
fit any of the principal combatants on the other side, e.g. Ted Frank.

>If you want to flame lets get to it ...  I offered
>a truce in the hopes of establishing some meaningful rhetoric.  

I would consider "meaninful rhetoric" a contradiction in terms, and your
subsequent posts showed (to me) malice and not intent to make peace.

As for me, I am not here to flame, just dropping in out of curiosity.  In
fact, I had no idea that this was the regularly scheduled flamefest on this
group until you convincingly demonstrated it to be so.

>... changing Greek Organizations is not as simple as passing a one line
>amendment to the Civil Rights Act.  Perhaps you do not realize the
>complexities involved.

One would expect the action of passing said hypothetical amendment to be
rather drawn-out and convoluted.  Once passed, the enforcement thereof
would likely be a simple matter.

>Rest assured, the Fraternities in this country would fight with every resource

It is not like that I heard the storm of protests when they are ordered to
desegregate by colour?  I am sure someone's already said this, actually.

>No Ted, we are not going away.  We will live on for no other reason than to
>serve as a continual reminder of your failure to eradicate us.  

I had no idea that your aims in life were so limited! :-)

>To all the others - especially ckincy and Professor (no clue) Who?, all I
>have to say is step to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What is the meaning of the last interesting construct?



Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Originator: news@nimaster
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 15:05:04 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.063653.2455@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>>I'd check out a few more campuses -- not to mention the Lawn -- before 
>>making a global statement like that.

>Like what?  That we should only change the name of a group when that
>group is offended by it?  That's how "nigger" got changed to "negro"
>and then to "black" and now slowly to "African American."  It happened
>(and continues to happen) because the picture of that racial group in
>society has changed drastically over the past 150 years.

Right.  We don't call women "co-eds" anymore; the assumption is no longer
 that student refers to a default value of "male student."  People didn't
like that idea anymore.

>I don't see hoards of 19-year-olds mobbing the admin buildings
>demanding to be called "first year students."  It just doesn't happen
>that way.  The whole "first year" bit has been brought about by people
>with nothing better to do.

Again, I'd like some documentation of that.  Who are these nameless language
tyrants?  And what of the many students I know who *did* protest the use
of "freshman" as long as 15 years ago?  

(And why would you hoard such people, let alone hordes of them? 8-)  )

Roger

Xref: sparky soc.college:5482 misc.legal:21303
From: c188-am@po.berkeley.edu (Leor Jacobi)
Subject: email UC Berkeley Financial Aid!
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 05:23:43 GMT

The following will be of use to those planning to attend Berkeley as 
Undergrads:

			ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE FORMATION OF
			     UCB.FINANCIAL-AID.INFO

It is now possible for you to correspond with the financial aid office via
personal e-mail.  Also, important financial aid information will be
avialable on the new newsgroup  ucb.financial-aid.info.

For more information, read: 	ucb.financial-aid.info

or send mail to: 		Financial Aid News
				fan@agate.berkeley.edu
From: mix@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject: Re: Sexist languagey
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:14:41 -0500
Followup-To: soc.college
Distribution: world
Organization: Georgetown University

In article <101955@netnews.upenn.edu>, pezzillo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Amy J. Pezzillo) writes:
> In article <1992Dec14.163456.9037@hobbes.kzoo.edu> k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy) writes:
>>gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>>>

>>And, as we all know, there's nothing sexist about someone writing "he"
>>in place of "he or she."  People who have to resort to artificial,
>>politically correct non-words like "first-year" and the singular "they"
>>are uneducated malcontents with nothing to do, and they're making up
>>problems where none exist.
>>
>>Right?
> 
Exactly, couldn't have said better.

Darrick Mix
Georgetown University
mix@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu
 
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:52:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.145019.22343@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.014104.9676@midway.uchicago.edu>
>thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
>
>> Are your opponents' arguments so strong that the only way you can refute
>> them is to misrepresent them and then make fun of the straw man? 
>
>I was trying to show a hypothetical argument -- just because a word
>happens to contain a certain combination of letters, eg. m-a-n or h-i-s
>doesn't mean it's sexist. 

And who made this hypothetical argument to begin with?

Are you incapable of seeing the difference between "mango" and "policeman"?

>> >Another point was
>> >to show that it wouldn't necessarily even be desirable to get rid of
>> >all 'sexist' terms.
>> 
>> And who called "this" a sexist term?  Other than you, that is?
>
>But 'history' is considered sexist by some feminists simply because it
>begins with the letters h-i-s.  Haven't you heard the word 'herstory'?

Only tongue in cheek.

>> >(Smileys for the humor-impaired, which I'd guess includes Ted Frank :-)
>> 
>> Funny, I keep turning up the brightness control on my monitor, but
>> your post doesn't seem to be getting any more intelligent.
>
>I guess it must have taken an Ivy League education to have understood
>my post.  Or else common sense.

If you're the result of an Ivy League education, I didn't miss much by
turning down Yale the last two times I got in.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637