Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watcgl.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!watcgl!dmmartindale From: dmmartindale@watcgl.UUCP (Dave Martindale) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: the power of words Message-ID: <2086@watcgl.UUCP> Date: Wed, 8-Feb-84 05:10:58 EST Article-I.D.: watcgl.2086 Posted: Wed Feb 8 05:10:58 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 10-Feb-84 01:02:45 EST References: <6762@watmath.UUCP> Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 34 From Sophie Quigley: The ideas expressed in there sound revolutionary when they are applied to women, words of wisdom when applied to men: "to every woman her chance, to every woman, regardless of her birth, her shining golden opportunity - to every woman the right to live, to work, to be herself, and to become whatever thing her womanhood and her vision can combine to make her". Doesn't this "every woman" sound like she is going to do all sorts of horrible things, like "destroy our families"? This is when ** THE TRUTH ** came to me: a "he" is a "he" is a "he" and a "she" is a "she" is a "she" and a "man" is .... and a "woman" is a ... When people say "he" they think "he" and they mean "he". The reason we "she"s have trouble understanding that ""he" means me too" is not because we have some kind of "translation problem" or "lack of imagination", but simply because "he" is ""he" (i.e. not me)". I laughed (inside), how could I have been so stupid all these years? I knew it all along and it is so obvious that "he" means "he", after all that's the definition of the word, isn't it?, why was I trying to believe that this wasn't true? Hmm. My immediate reaction to reading phrases such as those quoted above is "but why exclude men". I realize that women have probably thought exactly the same thing when hearing the male-oriented version of the sentence. I was surprised at the strength of my feeling of being "left out" because the phrases seemingly didn't apply to me. What the language needs is some concise way of specifying clearly that both sexes are intended yet is not too ugly to speak or write down. I haven't seen such a method, but perhaps I will now be a bit less supportive of the solution of just using masculine pronouns for the entire species.