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.
Re: Political Correctness Re: Manmonth or Peoplemonth?
Subject:Re: Political Correctness Re: Manmonth or Peoplemonth? From:Rahel Anne Bailie <rbailie -at- NEWBRIDGE -dot- COM> Date:Mon, 26 Apr 1999 14:55:34 -0700
Ginna Watts wrote:
> I wrote rather a lengthy essay on the topic of gender-specific language
> in university. Before I did the research, I believed it didn't matter -
> now I know it does.
>
> "Eric L. Dunn" wrote:
> >If you
> > see a gender issue in man-hours, the problem lies with your own perception
> > and not the word. (If you have 2 men and 2 women, all on the police force,
> > how many policemen do you have? Answer:4)
While it's probably been said here before, I find it worth repeating: the words
should focus on the task, not the gender of who is performing the task. In other
words, when my grandson and granddaughter argue about whether or not she can be
a fireman, I reply that fire*fighters* can be anyone because their job is to
fight fires. And they can be race car drivers, police officers, fishers (no, not
fishers of men, we're not Christian, thanks), bus drivers, engineers, writers,
or whatever else they may want to be ... except he can't be a mother and she
can't be a father, though they can both be parents. Putting this forth in my own
writing becomes my way of affirming this, and creating this for others who don't
yet have the vocabulary.
As an aside, the collective agreements in a previous work place used the generic
"she" (75% of the union staff were women); watching the reactions, including
automatic translation of "she" to "he" when reading a clause while referring to
specific male employees, was fascinating.
Rahel Bailie, Vancouver, BC
my opinions are strictly my own