From: mitch@novavax.UUCP (Mitch Silverman)
Newsgroups: soc.college
Subject: Re: Sexist languagey
Date: 18 Dec 92 03:18:30 GMT
Reply-To: mitch@cfraix.cfr.usf.edu (Mitch Silverman)
Organization: Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida

In article <1992Dec14.171441.2006@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu> mix@guvax.acc.georgetown.edu writes:
>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

I have to disagree.  There are some schools at which the term
"freshman" does not even apply.  At New College (NC), one is a first-,
second-, third-, etc. year student, and one will also be a thesis
student before one graduates.  Because of the large number of transfer
students at NC, one's first year here is counted from the first year
one is here, not one's first year in college.  At other schools, I don't
really understand the utility of the term "freshman"--why not dispense
with such labels altogether?  Tradition?  Ah, but tradition has its
problems, doesn't it?
 
Traditionally, "he" may have included the female pronoun in English
usage, but I disagree that such usage is acceptable now.  Such a usage
is most obvious in a language like Latin, wherein *one* male member of
a group, no matter how large, requires that the group be referred to
by the third-person plural *masculine* pronoun.  This usage is well
and good in Latin, but Latin is a dead language (by which I mean that
it no longer has any native speakers). English, however, is a living,
evolving language.  One of the central notions behind linguistics is
that there is an association between how  people communicate and how
they think (the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.)  If one wishes to communicate
that women are subordinate to men, one may.  But if one wishes to
imply that women and men are equal (a proposition I feel fairly safe
in advocating), one ought to so indicate in hir communication--in hir
use of the English language.
 
Mind you, I do not deny the right of anyone to continue what I feel to
be an archaic usage.  I'm a First Amendment absolutist--say what you
will.  But that doesn't mean I have to like such usage, or use it
myself.  I deplore such discriminatory and, yes, sexist usage, and I
reserve the right to take issue with it.
 
You may feel my position a bit extreme.  Well, perhaps so.  Allow me
to quote therefore the words of a man I have a great deal of respect
for, one whose words on the subject of justice and extremism often go
unheard in their entirety.
 
I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no
vice.  And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of
justice is no virtue!
 - Barry Goldwater
 
Think about it, please.
 
Mitch Silverman
Student, New College of the University of South Florida
 
 
  
Xref: sparky soc.college:5563 alt.usage.english:9512