Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site uiucdcs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!kaufman
From: kaufman@uiucdcs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Re: Gender-specific honorifics
Message-ID: <31600107@uiucdcs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 7-Feb-85 16:50:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uiucdcs.31600107
Posted: Thu Feb  7 16:50:00 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 9-Feb-85 06:35:33 EST
References: <1730@sdcrdcf.UUCP>
Lines: 22
Nf-ID: #R:sdcrdcf:-173000:uiucdcs:31600107:000:921
Nf-From: uiucdcs!kaufman    Feb  7 15:50:00 1985

/* Written 10:45 pm  Jan 30, 1985 by barryg@sdcrdcf in uiucdcs:net.women */
/* ---------- "Re: Gender-specific honorifics" ---------- */
I got one netter's intesting suggestin that the all purpose honorific should
be Mx.  (I think it's nice to use the algebraic "x" for unknown.  Very
elegant.)

Then my husband Barry suggested it would be more in keeping with the spirit
of UNIX to write it as M*.

(And besides that way there's less chance of fallout from missile makers.)

--Lee Gold
/* End of text from uiucdcs:net.women */

I'm afraid, neither one of these would really be non-sexist.  "Mx" would
invariably evolve to the point where it would be pronounced "missile",
and would thereby sound too much like the feminine "miss".  Similarly,
M* would be pronounced "masterisk", with obviously masculine implications.

Ken Kaufman (uiucdcs!kaufman)   [:-), if you hadn't figured that out]
"The computer is your friend."