PC Comments

Subject: PC Comments
From: "Dave L. Meek's User Account" <dave -at- DISC-SYNERGY -dot- COM>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 14:57:42 -0800

>From netcoms!vm1.ucc.okstate.edu!techwr-l Mon Nov 21 12:50:45 1994
>Message-Id: <199411212041 -dot- MAA14911 -at- netcomsv -dot- netcom -dot- com>
>Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 11:02:24 CST
>Reply-To: dlupo -at- vnet -dot- ibm -dot- com
>Sender: "Technical Writers List; for all Technical Communication issues" <TECHW
R-L -at- vm1 -dot- ucc -dot- okstate -dot- edu>
>From: Dan Lupo <dlupo -at- vnet -dot- ibm -dot- com>
>Subject: PC Comments
>Comments: To: techwr-l -at- vm1 -dot- okstate -dot- edu
>To: Multiple recipients of list TECHWR-L <TECHWR-L -at- osuvm1 -dot- bitnet>

>David Meek said:


>EXCERPT FOLLOWS============================================

>I have read claims that sexism is responsible for relegating
>"chairwoman" to relative obscurity. But I think the real answer is
>that "chairman" flows better than "chairwoman." Sexism is not the
>culprit. "Chairperson" is the worst-sounding of them all. Not only
>that, it serves no purpose. It's hard to be gender-free when you say,
>"Chairperson Sally Jones." And why would a woman *want* to hide her
>gender, anyway? It's not something to be ashamed of.

>The terms "womyn," "herstory," and
>others are pure nonsense. Are we to change "hispanic" to "herspanic?"
>How do we handle "menopause?" Does that term now refer to
>hesitant Irish males? And what about "person?" Doesn't it contain
>the dreaded male bias in "son?" (Oops--now there'll be a headlong
>rush to obliterate "son" from every word. And then "sun," since
>it sounds the same.)

>If the PC-fascists try hard enough, they can eventually make
>English a complete impediment to communication.

>END=========================================================

>Question about paragraph one above: Are you saying that the "flow" and
>"sound" of words serve as criteria for preferred usage? If so, can you
>support that claim with other examples?

>Question on paragraphs two and three above: Was it a calculated use of
>"rush" in your post or is it just a deliciously ironic --and appropriate--
>coincidence that I am perceiving?

>Dan Lupo
I believe a word's usage is derived more from convenience than
from any calculated intent. In my experience, the criteria arise
after the fact.

The phrase "headlong rush" is a fairly common one. However, I
suppose your question proves my point: you can see anything you
want if you try hard enough.



""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Dave Meek "It takes a big man to cry,
but it takes an even bigger man
to laugh at that man."
-Jack Handy


Previous by Author: Re: women and men (was Re: Hey, take it eas
Next by Author: Re: generic "he"
Previous by Thread: PC Comments
Next by Thread: PC Comments


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads