Conference turris::womannotes-v1

Yes, I notice.  In fact yesterday, I was glancing through the 1986 Engineering
Guide which just came in the mail.  The guide was *very* careful to always use
"his or her", "he or she", etc.  Well that's nice, I wonder why the male
pronoun was used first?  Is it because there are statistically more
male engineers and male bosses (I was reading the section: "In Relation to
the Boss")?  In that case, maybe they should have used the female pronoun
first in order to encourage more women?

I remember once writing a memo describing how a chip design engineer could
use a tool's feature.  I was careful to always use the female pronoun.
But darn it, I felt funny doing it.  I don't personally *know* any
female chip design engineers amongst the user group to which my memo was
addressed!

I also felt funny creating a "manpower" chart for the group I was supervising.  
My group was 5 females to 1 male.  I asked the manager if we could use the 
term "workforce" or some other term.  He agreed, but I do notice that an 
effort hasn't been made to keep "manpower" out of the plans.


...Karen

>I remember once writing a memo describing how a chip design engineer could
>use a tool's feature.  I was careful to always use the female pronoun.
>But darn it, I felt funny doing it.  I don't personally *know* any
>female chip design engineers amongst the user group to which my memo was
>addressed!

	That reminds me of a Fred Small song.  (He's a local folk singer).
	A restaurant owner says that he doesn't need any handicapped-
	accessible facilities, because "we don't get any of them here 
	anyway."

    Personal preference here...
    
    When I am writing memos, documentation, etc., and I come across
    a place where I need a pronoun, I first see if I can make it
    neuter.  I often find that "one's", "their", etc. sound just as
    good as "his" or "hers".  If I can't do that, I will usually use
    the female pronouns, just to balance things a bit.  In longer
    text, I may alternate - this is an idea I've seen in some childrens'
    books.
    
    I have a strong dislike for fabrications such as (s)he, his/hers,
    etc., and also find repetitions of "his or hers" and the like most
    irritating.  I agree that language is a powerful tool in molding
    people's underlying opinions, but it can backfire if it becomes
    too obvious that you are trying to effect a change.  

    (Some other time I may have a word or two about the use of
    "sisterhood".)
    				Steve

	    I find it interesting when people say that incorrect grammar
	sticks out like a sore thumb.  I've been so involved with this
	issue that every time I see a masculine word used as the generic
	("the user puts his keyboard on his head"), *that* sticks out
	like a sore thumb!
	    The singular use of "they" and "their" ("the user puts their
	keyboard on their head") and "themself" are frowned upon by
	grammarians and people who have been taught by grammarians that
	it's wrong.  The fact is that the singular "they" was used long
	before the "he"-is-generic rule showed up (which was fairly
	recent - it was an 1850 Act of (British) Parliament that put it
	on the books).
	    I tend to use the singular "they" when I can get away with
	it.  Most Americans, in fact, do use it in everyday conversa-
	tion (despite what their English teachers told them).  It does
	leave a plural-or-singular ambiguity, but I find this much less
	damaging than a male-or-generic ambiguity.  Studies show that
	most people conjure up male images rather than generic images
	when male-as-generic terms are used.
	    Other approaches that work well are to pluralize things
	("the users put their keyboards on their heads") or, if it will
	work, use "one" ("one then puts one's keyboard on one's head"
	- it doesn't work too well here).  One can also use "you" ("you
	put your keyboard on your head").

	    I also don't believe in putting the male terms first because
	they are male.  On the other hand, I don't think putting the
	female terms first because they are female is a solution either.
	I tend to do things alphabetically.  "Female and male," "man and
	woman," "daughter and son," "brother and sister," "Madam or Sir,"
	and "Gentlemen and Ladies."
       	    This is why I avoid using "he or she" and "her or his:" to
	go alphabetically with them is a mess ("he or she puts her or
	his keyboard on her or his head").

	    The definitive book on the subject is _The_Handbook_of_Non-
	sexist_Writing_, byt Casey Miller and Kate Swift.
			<_Jym_>

        This has (alas) been discussed to death in the JOY_OF_LEX
        conference, SUMMIT::JOYOFLEX.  There have even been some gems
        in there, but mostly the usual boring "You used the disgusting
        gender specific word (pick a word, any word), you're a SEXIST!"
        which gets old after a while.
        
        Tom

	    Well, Tom, perhaps we could get something constructive out
	of this Topic.  Perhaps the WOMANNOTES committee could help me
	with the one phrase I haven't found an acceptable nonsexist
	replacement for.
	    What can I call a "Straw Man" argument?
			<_Jym_>

    How about a "Scare Crow" argument?
    
    -sunny-

        I frequently write documentation for my tools... both "real"
        tools for work and "midnight" tools.  I generally try to
        avoid "his", "her", use "one" when appropriate, and occasionally
        resort to singular plurals (they).
        
        The most fun is to alternate feminine and masculine, though.
        I got a kick last week out of my co-worker coming in to my
        office, looking confused, with the copy of my document...
        slightly shaken because he'd come across a feminine pronoun.
        Brightened a dull day right up!
        
        As for the general topic of non-sexist generics, well some
        writers have used "it" as a generic for "he" or "she".  While
        it's a bit difficult to get used to referring to people that
        way, it does make a certain amount of sense as a generic.
        
        As for things like "chairman", how about "chair"?  Or simply
        "coordinator"?  Why do we need "straw man" proposals, anyway?
        How about "experimental", "prototype", "test"?  They're much
        clearer descriptions of the phrase's intent anyway.  A straw
        man proposal is something which should be hung on a stake
        out in a corn field, not discussed and improved upon...
        
        	/dave

    I've usually used the term "straw horse".  Never been misunderstood.

    	This subject is also being discussed in the Toastmaster's
    International notesfile, with emphasis on spoken as well as
    written communication.  Notesfile is COMET""::TOASTMASTERS.

    I came accross an interesting treatment of the man/woman words
    dilemma while reading through the Bylaws of the American 
    Federation of Musicians.  
    
    Throughout the bylaws, musicians were referred to as MEMBERS (of
    the Local) or MEN.  Unbelievable, I thought.  They don't even care
    enough to trip over he/she.  And then, way in the back, on the 
    last page...the next to the last section of the last Article, there
    it was:
    
    Article 30, Section 9.  Where used in these Bylaws, words in the
    masculine also shall be read and construed as in the feminine in
    all cases where such construction would apply.
                                                  
    
    Jo-Ann

re: .12
>Throughout the bylaws, musicians were referred to as MEMBERS (of
>the Local) or MEN.  ...
>Article 30, Section 9.  Where used in these Bylaws, words in the
>masculine also shall be read and construed as in the feminine in
>all cases where such construction would apply.

That's worse than it sounds -- "he" is a masculine word, but (some quick
research shows) the word "man" has no gender, although of course it refers
to males.

Technically, then, "man" in that document refers only to men.  Perhaps it's
time for them to re-write the bylaws.

    I always use "staff" in place of "manpower".  One of my male bosses
    even adopted it.
    
    Susan

    Instead of "straw-man" (as in "straw-man argument") how about
    
    "stuffed dummy"?  
    
    (And of course, in the computer biz, this phrase will
    
    often get shortened to "dummy argument".)   :^) 
    

The Boston Phoenix (1 Jun 86) had a very short article mentioning a
non-sexist writing guide.  It's called "S(he):  A Guide to Non-Sexist
Language".  It's available (for fifty cents) from the 
	Writing Program
	Box 3003
	Lancaster, PA  17064

I haven't sent for it yet, and know nothing about the Program or the guide.

					-- hal

     re .16:
     
     In the interest of egalitarianism, I hope that half of the people
     will send away to Lancaster, MA, for the booklet.
     
     --Mr Topaz

    How about French where if there is one man in a group of ten thousand
    women, the collective is referred to with the masculine plural.
    
    (Haven't introduced myself yet, promise I will.)
    
    Helen

    Replacement words:
    
    	Manpower = Labor
    	Men in Trees = Workers in Trees
        
    Hope this helps.
    
    

    I am a disciple of using language to change reality.  After all,
    that is the cardinal rule of marketing and politics.  Why else do
    we build "messages," "position," and talk about "features and
    benefits?"
    
    Anyway, I like the use of "labor" as opposed to "manpower."  I also
    use the terms, "labor-days/hours/months/years/etc." rather than
    "man-days...."  I feel that it is closer to the issue, namely how
    much work does it take to get so and so done.  Unfortunately, some
    folks, male and female, look at me like I have purple skin when
    I use said terms.                      

    Several years ago one of my teaching assistants submitted a
    potential test question (on probability) of the form
    
    	A secretary returned to the office with 5 cups of coffee;
    	3 had cream and 4 had sugar.  If the secretary randomly
    	selects a cup of coffee, what is the probability that
    	he will choose a cup with both cream and sugar?
    
    "...he..."!  I was delighted  -- especially because I hadn't expected
    it from this particular teaching assistant:  I didn't realize he
    was so aware of the effect of language!
    
    	Penelope

    I used this story on my young son and he began to learn about
    words.....
    
    "A man was involved in a traffic accident and his son, who was with
    him, was hurt.  An ambulance rushed them to the hospital and into
    the casualty department.  The doctor took one look at the boy and
    said "This is my son".

                                                          
    Another old story is:
    
    "There were two Red Indians walking down the street.  One was the
    father of the other one's son"
    
    Most people find these sorts of story very hard to understand!