jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (04/21/84)
"Sexist language and sexist thoughts are intertwined."
Um, well, yes. But that doesn't help determine what actaully *is*
sexist language and what isn't.
"language is a tool used to oppress women."
perhaps. Do you think it is a consciously used tool? Is it possible to
"use" a tool unconsciously?
Do you think that, bacause of this, societies that use gender-free languages
(recent net submissions have mentioned Japan, Turkey, and Finland) are less
sexist? If not, what does that say about the effectiveness of this tool and
the importance of the issue in general?
(I'd say it says, among other things, that the issue certainly doesn't
deserve the fifth bloody occurence of this silly argument, complete with
explanations of the origin of "man", on net.women.)
The point of language is to communicate. I'll use whatever usage seems
to communicate most effectively. Screams to the tune of "we have to get
rid of this usage" or "we can't change our language" are both beside the
point.
"m'lady is a term of respect."
And anyone who is not a child has heard terms of respect used
- outside of their normal context - as insults. As it seemed to me to
be used in the case in question.
one other thing. no one should expect net.women to be some kind of safe
intellectual haven for feminists or anyone else. It's all very well to
say, "read these books before I talk to you", but if you follow through on
that, you will probably find yourself talking only to those who agree with
you. In which case, your message isn't going to get very far.
(Aside: In a local (portland, or) interview (sympathetic to the point of
gushiness) Susan Brownmiller referred to "the irritableness that seems to
affect men 365 days of the year". If that sexism is characteristic
of her book, I have little interest in reading it.)
and what am I?
Jeff Winslow