Re: Political Correctness Re: Manmonth or Peoplemonth?

[Ginna Watts <gwatts -at- QUESTERCORP -dot- COM>]

I wrote rather a lengthy essay on the topic of gender-specific language
in university. Before I did the research, I believed it didn't matter -
now I know it does.

"Eric L. Dunn" wrote:
>If you
> see a gender issue in man-hours, the problem lies with your own perception
> and not the word. (If you have 2 men and 2 women, all on the police force,
> how many policemen do you have? Answer:4)

According to the research (which I can't quote because oddly enough, I
don't haul all my school essays to work), when gender-specific terms are
used, most people invariably picture the gender used. But if gender
neutral terms are used, the visual picture is that of your own gender.
If you thought hard about it, you may say "sure, but they could be men
or women", but that first mental image is the clincher.

For example: If I said that "the chairman of the board was A. Smith",
pretty much everbody's instant "mental picture" would be of a man. If I
said "the board was chaired by A. Smith", most men would picture a man,
and most women would picture a woman.

When the terms are plural, it gets a little more complicated, but in
general the same logic is applied. To use your "policemen" example, if a
news story said "four policemen were at the crime scene", most people of
both genders would picture four men. If the story said "four police
officers were at the scene", the majority of men would still picture
four men, but some would picture a mixed gender group. Most women would
picture a mixed gender group. A few women would picture all men, and
only a few women would picture all women.

To go back to the "manmonth" issue, if I wrote a project plan stating
that it would take my team of six "four manmonths" to finish, it would
irritate me to know that the reader's first mental picture would be of a
group of men, working like beavers to complete the project.

But with using the term "manmonth", there's a different problem - it's
used to mean different things. I've heard it used as "four manmonths",
meaning time billed but not necesarily elapsed. I.e., my team of six may
each be working 2-3 weeks on the project, with some overlap, to a total
of "four manmonths", or 2 elapsed months. OR the term may be used to
mean elapsed work time.

It's actually much more clear (and gender neutral!) if you write "it
will take the team 3 weeks of effort each, working over three months."

Ginna Watts - Technical Writer
Quester Tangent Corporation
Sidney, BC
gwatts -at- questercorp -dot- com


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=