TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Re: Gender bias (was Evolving language or laziness)
Subject:Re: Gender bias (was Evolving language or laziness) From:Mercedes Abels <maa5906 -at- GRIFFON -dot- MWSC -dot- EDU> Date:Tue, 19 Mar 1996 17:34:30 -0600
Tim,
Al I can say is that you are obiously missing the point here. Using "he"
here _does_ distract many readers, and not all of them female. Some male
readers are sensitive to the subtle bias exercised by the use of a male
pronoun being used to describe all humankind. I find it hard to believe,
after reading much of what you've written here, that you would not be put
off by being referred to as "she." I don't find it insulting to be
included in a genercic he, I find it slighting, dismissing and fairly
irritating when, after several discussins in which this opinion has been
voiced, I am still referred to as "he" simply because some writers find
it bothersome to find an acceptable alternative.
Marci Abels
maa5906 -at- mwsc -dot- edu
On Mon, 18 Mar 1996, Tim wrote:
> At 11:30 AM 3/18/96 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> I must disagree with your logic. In fact, using "he" doesn't distract most
> readers, because it's a default condition, not an abnormality. It's the
> unusual that distracts, not the expected. A cold day in February is hardly
> noted. A warm day in February is cause for office comment. That's why using
> "she" for the indeterminate pronoun distracts, rather than enhances. We
> naturally flow past items that we expect to see, and they cause no cognitive
> problems. My example using a neuter pronoun DOES call attention to itself,
> precisely because it uses a construction that's unexpected and hard to process.