HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language)
Date: 16 Dec 92 19:16:06 GMT
 <1992Dec15.021930.7866@midway.uchicago.edu> 
 <1992Dec15.144252.22445@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
 <1992Dec15.234308.27660@news.eng.convex.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0b1@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Dec15.234308.27660@news.eng.convex.com>
Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM> writes:

> 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.

Of course, this *is* what one would call "Standard Written English".


--Ted Schuerzinger
email: .zed@Dartmouth.EDU
"I should have known it would be bad vodka when all the label said was
'Russian Vodka'."
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: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:48:14 GMT

In article <BzBs7x.97G@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.160035.6467@bmerh85.bnr.ca> nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) writes:
>>In article <BzACqt.40D@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:

>>>You're absolutely right! Changing words will do little to efface
>>>prejudices in the minds of men. (yes, men - which includes women) :)

>>If "men" is as gender-neutral as you claim, why do you need to specify
>>that in *this* case, you mean it to be inclusive, not exclusive?  Or
>>is your "DEPENDING ON CONTEXT" not as clear as you would like?

>It isn't clear to persons who are *already* prejudiced. When they
>encounter the proverbial usage of "man", "mankind", etc. they
>assume that these usages refer to men only and NOT to women.

EXACTLY.  And we meet people like that every day.  Now, if we wish
to *communicate* with those people, we must use the right word to
do so.  Either that, or we can begin by lecturing them on context
and the like, which isn't a good way to go about one's daily business.
So we *need* to use accurate words that get the meaning we want across
to the people we're talking to.  And that means not saying "men" if
we don't *know* that the listener will assume "human."

And we rarely know.

>   In this case, I was replying to a prejudiced individual, and
>felt the need to make the distinction clear. If these prejudices
>weren't in existence, I would have had no cause to elaborate; nor
>would  anyone else have the "sexist" problems we are currently
>encountering in our English usage.

Mandar, you're writing to 50,000 people here.  "A prejudiced individual"
(pot calling the kettle black, Mr. "rabid feminists"!) is not the issue 
on a newsgroup. 

>>Now if you'd writing "in people's minds", there would have been no
>>confusion . . .

>Really!  I think you are confused!  :)
>You let your prejudice that men includes men only, and not women,
>when used in this context, override your ability to make logical
>decisions.

It's not a prejudice.  It's a FACT.  To many people, that's what 
"men" means.  And you're always at risk of speaking to one or more
of those people.  

Besides, what marker *was* there to signal the "men-and-women"
context?  I didn't see one.  How do you know what context you're 
in here?  Show your work.

Roger

Xref: sparky soc.college:5729 alt.usage.english:9702
From: varhus@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Kristofor A Varhus)
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 15 Dec 92 04:34:31 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

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:

>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

To tell the truth (and I'm not just saying this), the 'his' in that sentence
did not conjure up an image of men.  When I read a pronoun like 'his' or 'he'
which has no antecedent, I don't really pay attention to the fact that
'his' is usually used to denote someone of the male gender.  I think of it
as referencing anyone.  (By the way, 'his' is not a correct word to use
in that sentence, because 'his' is for either gender, and obviously the
persons referenced by 'his' must be women, and cannot be men.)  It seems
kind of strange that I, a male, would be so "non-sexist" (I know, it's not
a word, but don't flame me over it).  I think that's the way everyone thinks
about these kinds of words (like 'his'), and if you had not called attention
to it before hand and made is look for the incorrect usage of the pronoun,
no one agree with you that that sounded strange.  In fact, if someone used
that sentence in real life almost no one would notice.

>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.

If you want to use 'she or he', go ahead.  And even 'she' is fine with me,
even though 'she' brings up images of females (unlike 'he').  But I don't
really see how 'she' is truly gender-neutral.  For that matter, 'she or he',
'he or she', and 'he' aren't either.  The only ones, however, that are
correct language for denote people of either gender, are 'he' or 'he or she'.

--
\_\_\_\_  \_\_\_\_  \_    \_  \_    \_      |     Kristofor A. Varhus 
 \_    \_  \_        \_\_  \_  \_\_  \_     |  varhus@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
  \_\_\_\_  \_\_\_\_  \_ \_ \_  \_ \_ \_    |
   \_        \_        \_  \_\_  \_  \_\_   |   University of Pennsylvania
    \_        \_\_\_\_  \_    \_  \_    \_  | Engineering and Applied Science
Xref: sparky soc.college:5559 alt.usage.english:9505
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language)
Date: 15 Dec 92 02:19:30 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <1992Dec15.002645.1684@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> J.Theodore.Schuerzinger@dartmouth.edu (J. Theodore Schuerzinger) writes:
>> "he" as a for someone of unspecified gender,
>  ^^^^
>
>Except that this usage is correct.  Look it up in a usage book.

Depends on your usage book.

>BTW: Finnish has one word, han (with two dots over the a), to specify
>both he and she.

It's a shame we don't have a third-person singular the way the Finnish
do.  It would be a simple solution. 
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Newsgroups: soc.college,soc.net-people,news.answers
Organization: Middle East Technical University - Computer Center
Date: Friday, 18 Dec 1992 14:45:01 TUR
From: Ergin TONUK <A11159@TRMETU.BITNET>
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject:    I wanna contact with Prof.Dr. Isik Inselbag

I would like to contact with Prof.Dr. Isik Inselbag (he is supposed to be
the Dean of Wharton School). If you could send me his e-mail adress I
would be thankful.
A11159@TRMETU.BITNET
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi)
Subject: Re: They (was Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language))
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 01:18:11 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

In article <1992Dec20.233047.24993@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>In article <BzJtDr.D3I@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@banshee.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec19.181833.22444@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>>>
>>>I know no one my age who rejects the semantically singular "they", except
>>>perhaps in extremely formal writing.  
>>
>>This is either ignorance or an attempt at being dense. Rosemary, MANY
>>persons on the soc.college newsgroups rejected the use of "they" as
>>in "That person isn't late, are they?" and *most* of them are of your
>>age.
>Most people my age do not post on the net.  

So their absence indicates their agreement with your statement???
Anyway, most people of ANY age don't post to the net. That doesn't
prove anything.

>The net is hardly representative of the population in general.  

That is debatable. People from different backgrounds post to the net
and the variety in opinions you encounter here, is hardly observed
in real life.

>(And even the people on the net who have
>opposed the use of "they" in lieu of "he" occasionally slip and use "they"
>forms!)

Nobody's perfect! Don't tell me that you ALWAYS write *without* a
single grammatical/spelling mistake.

                                                           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.
Xref: sparky soc.college:5543 misc.entrepreneurs:3609
From: stuczyns@presto.ig.com (Martin Stuczynski)
Newsgroups: soc.college,misc.entrepreneurs
Subject: Largest Universities
Keywords: Population
Date: 14 Dec 92 23:26:03 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Organization: IntelliGenetics Inc., Mtn. View, Ca.


I'm compiling a list of the top 20 domestic Universities ranked by 
student population. If you know which Universities qualify or think
your school should be included , please forward it's name and
location.


Thanks in advance, 

Marty

<marty@presto.ig.com>
Xref: sparky soc.college:5650 alt.usage.english:9629
From: sutherla%peruvian.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Mathew Sutherland)
Subject: Mixed Drinks,etc
Date: 17 Dec 92 23:24:45 MST
Organization: University of Utah CS Department, Salt Lake City, UT.



		
	In the spirit of the Holidays, and my need for something like this,
I'm going to be compiling a list of mixed drinks, etc.
	So if you have some kind of a drink that you like, smart drinks,
mixed drinks, combinations, knock-you-on-your-ass-after-one-sip drinks,
etc., please send them to me.  I'll be re-posting the list if it seems
people are interested, and if I get enough response. 

	Thanks!

___------________------________-----__________-------_________------_______---
	       Eventually, all things merge into one,
		    and a river runs through it.
    Mathew Sutherland ----------------------- sutherla@peruvian.cs.utah.edu

P.S.  Why soc.college?  Since I'm a college student myself, I thought I would
get some input from other college students.  Why rec.food.drink?  
Obvious 8-)


___------________------________-----__________-------_________------_______---
	       Eventually, all things merge into one,
		    and a river runs through it.
    Mathew Sutherland ----------------------- sutherla@peruvian.cs.utah.edu
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
From: mmmirash@banshee.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi)
Subject: Re: They (was Re: Shaking people up with "she"? (was Re: Sexist language))
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 08:10:39 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

In article <1992Dec19.181833.22444@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>
>I know no one my age who rejects the semantically singular "they", except
>perhaps in extremely formal writing.  
>-- 
>Rosemary Waigh             Undergraduate, Computer Science / Linguistics

This is either ignorance or an attempt at being dense. Rosemary, MANY
persons on the soc.college newsgroups rejected the use of "they" as
in "That person isn't late, are they?" and *most* of them are of your
age. What *is* your age anyway?

                                                           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.
Xref: sparky soc.college:5813 alt.usage.english:9801
From: mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 21 Dec 92 01:12:07 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA

In article <1992Dec20.232748.24859@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>In article <BzJpL1.ArF@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@banshee.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
>>Take a spot poll, Tom. Find how many native speakers find the following
>>exchange of conversation natural :
>>
>>         "Is Joan there?"
>>         "No, they went to the market."
>>
>Since "they" has been proposed as an alternative to "he", you had better
>also see how many native speakers find this exchange of conversation 
>natural:
>
>          "Is Joan there?"
>          "No, he went to the market."
>
>-- 

"They" has been proposed as an alternative for he or "he or she". All
right, I'll provide a better example :

 "The child has to wipe their feet before entering the house."

 "The doctor isn't here, is they?"


Now find how many native speakers find that grammatically correct.

                                                          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.
From: buccim@newton.hartwick.edu
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject: I'm back and badder than before
Date: 11 Dec 92 02:17:12 -0500
Organization: HARTWICK COLLEGE

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

I have seen several postings which make reference to my mistakingly misquoting
George Orwell's work Animal Farm.  I acknowledged this mistake, and apologized.
Apparently, people such as Professor Who? have nothing to do but beat a dead 
horse.  If you read my subsequent posting you would have realized this.

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?

If you want to flame lets get to it boyz (intentionally misspelled)!  I offered
a truce in the hopes of establishing some meaningful rhetoric.  I guess you are
not interested?  Maybe like Ted, you did not see that posting.

By the way Ted, 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.  You've heard of Special Interest Groups?  I'm sure
you know what an appeal is.  I'm sure you know that any such amendment would
not be allowed to be enforced while under appeal to a Federal District Court,
or heaven forbid the rather Conservatively stacked Supreme Court.  Let's not
forget President-Elect Clinton (yecchhhhh) is Greek, and while he is part of
a coed fraternity - my fraternity - he understands the value of single sex
Greek Letter Organizations.  Your simple one sentence amendment could turn into
legal battles encomposing an entire decade and costing millions of dollars.

Rest assured, the Fraternities in this country would fight with every resource
available, perhaps we would use some of our networking influence - ya think?
Worst case scenario Ted, we go underground like we did at our inception.  I
haven't heard you address this issue yet, I've made reference to it several
times.  Funny, like usual no response.

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

In Leadership, Friendship, and Service
Brother Michael P. Bucci
Alpha Phi Omega - National Service Fraternity (coed)
Kappa Omega - Local Social Fraternity (just the boys)
                 
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
From: jnomina@andy.bgsu.edu (A.P.K.)
Subject: Re: Frosh (was Re: Sexist language (was...
Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 04:30:04 GMT

Sorry to wade into this discussion at such a late time, and not to
pick on any one person within this discussion, just my $.02:

g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
> I guess you missed my original posting, which gaved the non-sexist term used
> at UofT, namely "frosh".  Only one syllable!  Just think of the time you can
> save by adopting this term! :-)

No thanks, I don't like "frosh".  In German it means "frog", and I
don't think I'd want to be considered a frog.

> 
>>Why do you take the word "freshman"
>>(or any other -man word, for that matter) as being offensive when no one
>>(absolutely no one - you find someone, and I'll stop using the word) uses
>>it in a derogatory fashion?  
> 
> Because it is inaccurate, and perpetuates the myth that being male is the
> norm and being female is exceptional.

Following this argument to it's fullest, we aren't humans anymore,
right?  We're now hu-persons.

Also, following the idea of "first-year student" vs. "freshman",
I could say that I find that particularly offensive on the
grounds that I'm considered a non-traditional student.  Being
non-traditional, I've gone to school year-round and first-year
only implies the more traditional angle of students just out of
high school and attending a regular schedule of classes, to include
a definitive separation between "years" as having summers off.
But then, I'm a W.A.S.P. male, so I'm politically incorrect in
just about everything I think and do unless it's deliberately
thought about and _made_ politically correct, so...  :)

Jim

Xref: sparky soc.college:5687 alt.usage.english:9663
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:24:33 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

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

>Isn't this a basic tenant of English? :-)

No, there are rules, such as the fact that H. Dumpty, being a person,
should be referred to by a personal pronoun, e.g.

"Isn't he a basic tenant of English?" :-)
-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh          +44 (0)31 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Frosh (was Re: Sexist language (was...
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 16:07:56 GMT

In article <BzDu5I.LGF@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> mmmirash@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Mandar M. Mirashi) writes:
>
>    Compare the use of the so-called "sexist" words to the use of
>nuclear energy. Nuclear energy can be put to *both* constructive
>and destructive purposes. If people are taught to eschew the
>destructive use of nuclear energy, "nuclear-free" zones will not
>be necessary. The problem lies *not* with the tool/weapon, but rather,
>with the wielder of that tool/weapon. Besides, any amount of
>"constructive improvement" on this tool/weapon can always be circumvented 
>by an equivalent "destructive design", by the abuser.

OK, so nuclear energy can be used destructively, however many safeguards
one puts into place.  No point in putting in any safeguards then, is
there?  No point trying to design safer nuclear plants, no point in
non-proliferation treaties, no point in keeping nuclear technology out
of the hands of Khaddafi and Saddam Hussein.

Is this really what you believe?

Just what *is* wrong with seeking to use non-sexist language?  Just what
*is* wrong with people saying "people" instead of "men" (as I do in this
sentence)?

If I'd said "men using" instead of "people using", people might have
thought "men and women"; then again they might not.  By using "people",
I safeguard myself against a possible misunderstanding.

Most people will agree if I say "All men are created equal" - but they
won't all be agreeing to the same thing.  Some *will* think this
excludes women, so I will not have made my point clear to them.  If I
say "All persons are created equal", I will make my point much more
clearly.  I won't necessarily convince anyone who doesn't believe women
are equal, but at least I will have communicated to them that I believe
so.

BTW, I started reading "Five Children And It" by E. Nesbit last night -
a book written years ago, in very English English.  On the first page,
I read:

   Everyone got its legs kicked or its feet trodden on in the scramble
   to get out of the carriage that very minute, but no one seemed to
   mind.

Do you consider this bad writing, Mandar?  Would you really have been
happier if Nesbit had used "his" in that sentence?

       The Rhealist - nadeau@bnr.ca - Speaking only for myself
From: acbonin@unix.amherst.edu (Adam Bonin)
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject: Honor Codes (was That Whole CU Mess)
Date: 21 Dec 92 00:09:14 GMT
Followup-To: soc.college
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]

Judy Gurka (gurka@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU) wrote:
: pg@sanitas.stortek.com (Paul Gilmartin) writes:
: >I'm somewhat dismayed that at as crucial an event as a term final for 500
: >students the French department (according to Wednesday's RMN) did not choose
: >to have a faculty member present.
: 
: According to the Colorado Daily, one professor (out of how many?) was 
: there for the first 45 minutes, then left.
: 

Well, that's not at all unusual here, but the standard.  Our unwritten honor
code has it that profs distribute the exams, hang out for a few minutes to
answer questions, and then leave, returning to pick up the exams at the end.
It's a matter of trusting students, and in fact I think it's a good thing, not
a bad one...

-adam
----
Adam Bonin '94
Amherst College
acbonin@amherst.edu

"He who accepts evil without fighting against
 it is really cooperating with it."
                   -MLK
Xref: sparky soc.college:5527 alt.usage.english:9488
From: lee5@husc8.harvard.edu (Patrick Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.college,alt.usage.english
Subject: Re: Sexist language
Date: 14 Dec 92 20:00:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc8.lee5.724363240
 <1992Dec14.060934.5086@Princeton.EDU> <1992Dec14.063653.2455@news.columbia.edu> <1992Dec14.163456.9037@hobbes.kzoo.edu>


Sigh.. Why not just call them Frosh like I'm used to.. 
 Single Syllable
 Non-gender specific
 Communicates that the person is a first year undergrad(nontransfer)
 Sufficiently derrogatory (Silly Frosh...) 

-Pat