Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihuxb!wfmans
From: wfmans@ihuxb.UUCP (w. mansfield)
Newsgroups: net.nlang,net.women
Subject: Re: Pronouns devoid of gender connotations
Message-ID: <1087@ihuxb.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Jul-85 15:17:06 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxb.1087
Posted: Wed Jul  3 15:17:06 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 4-Jul-85 05:36:08 EDT
References: <2718@decwrl.UUCP>, <498@rtech.UUCP> <743@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 8
Xref: watmath net.nlang:3322 net.women:6224

I hesitate to bring this up, but I seem to remember from my history class
that the word man (used as in "all men are created equal") at one time
not only did not include women, but also did not include non-whites.
I thought that in colonial america slaves and women were considered
chattels of their (male) owners, not equal at all.  I realize that
most folk no longer subscribe to this view, but it could be behind
the (my opinion) unreasonable animosity toward male-sounding nouns.
I don't care much, as long as no one asks me to change my name.