TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: generic pronouns [2] From:"Kahn, Stacey" <skahn -at- WB -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 9 Aug 1995 12:17:15 U
Jeffrey Pittman (Jpittman49 -at- AOL -dot- COM), NRA member and longtime monogamist,
writes:
[snip]
> I, for one, don't give a fig what words I use to indicate the user/subject
> of the documents I write because I know that these words have been made up
> by previous generations of the speakers of the English language.
[snip]
> When we all stop worrying about what offends us, and start worrying about
> what may offend others, then maybe we can also stop killing each other.
[snip]
Haven't we settled this yet?
Probably a dozen people (myself included) have posted to this list expressing
their personal opinions that generic male usage offends them. To my eyes this
*does* indicate that the usage "offend[s] others".
If history were sufficient reason to accept something, we'd still be living in
caves, or dying of smallpox, or limiting the vote to white, property-owning
males.
History and stylebooks notwithstanding, I will not do business with, will not
purchase, will not recommend, will not use, and will not accept in my home any
product or service that uses "he" "him" or "his" to refer to a person of
unknown sex.
--Stacey Kahn Washington, D.C.
skahn -at- wb -dot- com
not fruity, just human
speaking for herself and not for her employers
