anton (07/09/82)
Feminism in England has a very different face from in America; it is concerned more with social eqaulity and fulfilment, trying to counter 'roles' which are still being indoctrinated on this continent, mainly by the advertising industry and it 'labour saving' and 'home-making' projections of females. As long as women are being compelled to worry about makeup, deodourants, fashion... they will be second class citizens. Political and business achievements are secondary, they burn up 'men-who-would-be-managers' as readily as women. The mutilation of language by rabid feminists is just such another sublimation and misdirection. In England, it is perfectly normal to address the female head of a meeting as 'madam chairman' or 'madam chairwoman'. The term "ChairPERSON" is taken as vulgar, and by many women as insulting. An example in point is quoted by one female English journalist who went to America to cover some event. She wrote up her 'adventures' there for the women's page (although by the letter received, it has more male readers...) of the Guardian. On arrival after being moved by coach to the site of said event, the guide pointed out where ther washrooms were; the words ran something like... "The mens' washrooms are over there and the persons' are along the corridor." The substitution of 'person' for 'ladies' or 'women' is what is termed a euphenism. Euphenisms remove two words from the language, the one they are substituting for, and the real meaning of the euphemistic word. It is in this that the danger of the personification of feminism lies. No doubt there are bigots, but I doubt whether most people meet one rabid feminist's accusation of the early '70s: "We say 'The Brotherhood of Man' and pretend we also mean the 'Sisterhood of Women'." For the most part, English is a genderless language; we don't see German & French feminists trying to mangle their language because a noun that they don't want associated with women is feminine in gender, or some complementary one is masculine. Watch out everyone, or next the churches will be holding EcuPERSONical meetings, and you will be receiving memos from the PERSONagment or perhaps even the PERSONagPERSONSnt ! No, its not mangling the language, its PERSONgling it. Why are they doing this to our language ? I don't know, but there is a line in 'Number of The Beast' which bodes omminous: ".. give them the vote ? We should neve have taught them to speak.." Yes, then they wouldn't be turning a language into a parody of interpersonal communication. (OK, let the falmes rip !) /anton aylward