From: jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeffrey S Linder)
Subject: Re: Freshman
Organization: The Ohio State University
    JSL:
    Freshman doesn't exclude any gender.  Freshwomen does
    (no such word).  Freshperson would lead me to believe
    that they were referring to a female because they went
    to pains to invent a new word.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 13:02:09 GMT

    CM:
    So, saying `freshperson' IS gender specific then? But
    saying `freshMAN' is not? I think you are reading too
    much into the statement here.  Dammit, I deleted the bit
    where you said that you go by what a word MEANS not what
    you can read into it. I think you contradict yourself
    here.

As I said, 'freshperson' would lead ME to believe that they
were referring to women since they went to extraordinary
measures to avoid using the proper term 'freshman'.  As I
said in an earlier post, freshman means a first-year stu-
dent.  Not just a first-year male student or first-year
female student.
To answer your second point, you have to go by what a word
MEANS in a conversation.  If you go by the assumption that
it is acceptable for anyone to read anything they want into
the words you use, conversation could not exist.

    To repeat another post, what is wrong with `fresher'?

No one has been able to demonstrate the problem with 'fresh-
man', so why should we use some slang term?

    Trying to claim `man' as generic is passe. One simple
    rebuttal I like is the following situation. (you may
    like to try this on someone.)

    Point to a group of women, and say `see those men over
    there'.  (the `men' here is generic)

Since you POINT to a group a women you are referring to them
so men would be inappropriate.

What if a bunch a women were doing something silly (that men
also do) and you say: "Man has a lot to learn about not
being silly".  Would you be referring to 1) men, b) women,
or c) the human race?  (Try answer 'c').

    Alternatively, make a statement like `every man has a
    duty to give birth at least once, in order to promulgate
    the race'.

Since only women can give birth, 'man' would be inappropri-
ate.  Try: "Man has a duty to reproduce to promulgate the
race".  Same question as above.  (Try answer 'c').

    JSL:
    By the way, what gender is "they" in the previous sen-
    tence?

    CM:
    nonspecific, but it would be reasonable to assume fe-
    male, since the specific term you generalised to `they'
    was `female'.

If it is non-specific why read anything into it?  This is
precisely my point.  Freshman in non-specific, why must you
read gender into it?

    JSL:
    If you feel that you have been treated unfairly in this
    discussion and which to pull out, feel free.  A little
    advice is in order before you go.  GROW UP YOU LITTLE,
    IMMATURE WIMP.  IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
    BEING ATTACK PERSONALLY AND HAVING YOUR OPINIONS AND
    IDEAS ATTACKED, YOUR IN THE WRONG PLACE TO BE ARGUING
    YOU INSIPID POINTS.  NEXT TIME YOU WANT TO DEBATE WITH
    SOMEONE, TRY TALKING TO A MIRROR BECAUSE YOU SAY ENOUGH
    STUPID, CONTRADICTORY THINGS THAT YOU WON'T KNOW WHO
    SAID WHAT. [ tiny flame ].

    CM:
    not that you ever need to shout  at anyone, just because
    you can't make them agree with you, hmm?

I am not trying to make anyone agree with me, I am frustrat-
ed my Mr. Werling's attempts at debate.

    A couple of points: the above attack looks very personal
    to me. : by shouting, and letting your grammar and
    spelling degenerate as you did, you further convinced me
    that you have at least a big a problem as you claim the
    other person has.

Congratulations, I was getting personal.  I was accused of
throwing flames so I didn't want to make Mr. Werling a liar.
Please tell me what my problem is?

Jeff.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism