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.