From: midnight@mdnite.enet.dec.com (Dr. Midnight)
Subject: Re: QUESTION: Looking for "women's" rpg.
Reply-To: midnight@mdnite.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 18:09:12 GMT


In article <1992Sep10.150400.9984@nntp.uoregon.edu>, rugi@cie.uoregon.edu 
(Russ Gilman) writes:

>Language does not define a culture, that is true.  But by telling women/womyn
>that they cannot get some form of satisfaction by defining their language,
>you are telling them that they are not part of the culture that shapes the
>language- you are denying them that right.  They are trying to find a place for
>women/womyn with less of an emphasis on the "men".
 

(I tried to resist this, knowning that this notesfile is not for PC discussion
--that is,Political Correctness, not Player Characters.  This, however, is a
pet peeve....)
              
I've always thought this language bickering was taking the whole Equal
Rights/Womens Rights thing way too far, and far too pettily.


Calling me human makes me no less of a woman.  
             ^^^                         ^^^

To call me a womyn is to call me something which I am not.  I am not a beet, I
am a woman.  I am not a yew tree, I am a woman. I am not a
womyn, I am a woman.  I will always be a woman.  I am not ashamed or or
demeaned by what I am, and I am a woman.  I shall not fear a word because it 
contains the letters MAN.  There are many other things women must work against
--the glass ceiling, inequal pay for equal work, the fact that there are *still* things we are not allowed to do
because of our gender.  We should not be so afraid, so insecure in ourselves
that we take umbrage at three letters, which by themselves mean something, but
in "our" word, mean exactly nothing without the two other letters in front.  We
are not wo-men, we are women.  "Our" word is no lesser, nor greater, for how it
is spelled.  And it is spelled W O M A N.  

And that's all right.

>Wrong!  I resent that, and I'm a male.  Women resent it because there's 
>no general possibility (for someone not as enlightened as yourself) for
>a "neutral" noun for an unknown person.  I resent it because by making
>the male pronoun "he" stand-in for a neutral noun "it" or "them" you take
>the masculinity from the "he".  In other words, if the "he" is neutral,

We are not performing castration here.  You, as a man, are no less a he, than
say, Bob, over there, no matter how many generic persons are referred to as
"him".  As I am no less a woman than having all those generic "he"s floating
around.  The masculinity isn't ripped out of "he", just as the femininity 
isn't ripped out of the word "she" (because it does have, after all, the 
dreaded 'he' right after the s....)

That's my two cents.  Of course, your mileage may vary.  


I suppose if anyone wants to debate my point with me, mail is the appropriate
means.

--                 
Midnight
midnight@mdnite.enet.dec.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~            
 ====   |   
 |  |   |The opinions expressed are mine,
 |  |   |and should not be taken to be those
------  |of Digital Equipment Corporation
  o o   |
    ]   |------------------------------------
   ""   |"Part of the Ed Vaughn experience."
 |>0<|  |
 

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp,rec.games.frp.misc