Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: The "his", "he" Issue
From: mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:21:15 EDT
Organization: Wesleyan University

hasn@midway.uchicago.edu (Sheheryar Hasnain) writes:

>>    By the way, your above statement should read "if MOST people of this society
>> feel . . . then the need for change exists."
> 
> Sheheryar: What you're implying is that blacks should not have gotten the vote
> if "most" people felt that blacks should not vote (just to give an example off
> the top of my head).

   I was talking about liguistics, which has nothing to do with voting rights.
BTW, blacks wouldn't have gotten the vote if a majority of the nation's voters
hadn't wanted them to.  Because the concept of color-blind rights is so morally
proper, though, the protestings won people over.

> Sheheryar:  Step away from all of the "systems" you follow, Max, and maybe
> you'll find that the meaning of "correct" and "incorrect" are as fluid as 
> "labour"(what I was taught in Britain) and "labor" (when I got brainwashed by
> you Americans :-)).  I think the 
> original statement was "man breastfeeds his young" since a man
> can "nurse" his child.  Rather than all of this hodgepodge, whats wrong with
> "woman breastfeeds her young"?

   No, the meanings of "correct" and "incorrect" are perfectly clear no matter
what the system.  What can change are the things that are so termed. 
Sherheryar, if you can't grasp the meaning of the term "correct," why should we
think you've grasped the term "man?"
   The original sentence in its entirety was this -- "Like all other mammals,
man breastfeeds his young."  The word "man" refers to the species as a whole.  
The phrase "woman breastfeeds her young" would refer not to the species as a
whole but specifically to one half of it.
   You may think that this would be just as appropriate, but consider the first
half of the phrase, "Like all other mammals."  For the phrase to be properly
constructed, it must refer to all humans, and thus use the neutered form.

   BTW, I'm still waiting for someone to demonstrate why someone who uses the
neutered forms in English must necessarily be sexist.
 
> Sheheryar:  What is so naive about someone if she thinks that the system
> is only so good as what it does for us and not vice versa. 

   Well, that particular woman you refer to wouldn't be far from the truth. 
Unfortunately, what you originally said was that "a system is only as good as
the purpose it serves."  Given the context, I took you to mean "only as good as
the principles to which it claims devotion."  In other words, a system rooted
in sexism, even if it performs a noble task, is no good.
   If instead you meant "only as good as what it accomplishes," then I remove
my remark about naivity.  If that is the interpretaion you espouse, I am glad; 
not only is it fairly sensible, it is opposed to many of the ideas you
supported earlier.  Good to know I'm getting through.

Max Zener

Pray reveal
> the joke so all of womankind can laugh along with you!  However, if 
> what you mean by naivity is "lack of acceptance of the "correctness"
> of human-made systems(even though man-made would be more appropriate in this 
> case), then you are probably right in calling me naive.