“Inclusive” language

This is another shot at feminist nonsense. I can’t let Mark have that field all to himself!

What could be more illiterate and uneducated than the feminist claim that the word “man” is sexist, paternalistic or male chauvinist? Thus “women” is said to be sexist and in need of replacement by “womyn” and “chairman” becomes “chair”, “chairperson” or whatnot. I would readily believe that such proposals were a joke of some sort but they are in fact quite serious. Such feminist linguistic pronouncements quite simply show profound ignorance of normal English usage. Many words have more than one meaning and it has long been conventional in English that “man” has both a generic and a specific meaning—translatable to “men and women” or “mankind” in its generic sense and “human adult male” in its specific sense. This is nothing more than a quirk of English. Other languages have two words for the two meanings. Thus Latin has “vir” and “homo” and German has “Mann” and “Mensch”. So does that make Germans and ancient Romans less sexist and paternalistic than the English? If you believe that you would believe anything! The plain truth that any educated English-speaking person would once have been able to tell you is that usages containing the word “man” in English are ALREADY inclusive. They already refer to both men and women. Neologisms (fancy new words) are simply not needed.

The feminist “diktat” in this matter is therefore a clear example of the uneducated purporting to educate. I am myself profoundly suspicious of much that passes for formal education (from literary studies to environmental studies) and do not at all condemn people for being uneducated per se. After all, Christ’s disciples were “agrammatoi kai idiotai” (generally translated as “ignorant and unlearned”—in other words common men rather than Pharisees) yet the light they had eventually illuminated the world. What I do find grotesque, however, is the ill-informed endeavouring to dictate to the better informed.

Mind you, there is one feminist linguistic innovation that I do like. I like the usage “Ms”. It is often seen as a bit ugly but I simply find it convenient. Why should I have to find out whether a woman is married or not in order to address her correctly? “Ms” sure saves some bother. I also find it silly that women still generally take their husband’s surname when they marry. What a lot of trouble and confusion for no advantage to change all their documents etc. And then they get divorced and change everything yet again. The custom perhaps made sense when people married for life but the modern-day world is nothing like that. I would think that at least two marriages would be the norm nowadays.

An even sillier usage is the (now hopefully totally old-fashioned) custom of the wife being referred to by her husband’s FIRST name as well. Thus my mother was on certain occasions known as “Mrs Frank Ray” or “Mrs F.E. Ray” when her first name was in fact “Margaret”. Wow! is all I can say to that. So when it comes to feminist linguistic concerns, I once again find myself in a middle ground of sorts.

Another “modern” usage that I like is “sex-worker” instead of “prostitute”. I have never been a customer of one but it seems pretty clear to me that what they do is work and they are surely more to be pitied than condemned.

Posted by jonjayray on Wednesday, June 29, 2005 at 08:24 PM in Feminism
Comments (6) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Posted by Mark Richardson on June 30, 2005, 01:51 AM | #

The change which irks me most is the use of the word actor to describe actresses. It runs against instinct to “overlook” the femaleness of such women. (Who are we kidding in applying a non-gendered term to Kim Basinger or Nicole Kidman or Gwyneth Paltrow?)

Two points of disagreement with John. First, I think it’s a healthy instinct for a man to identify with his wider family and its interests and achievements. Therefore it’s sensible for the family name to pass down the male line.

If, for instance, I grow up with some pride in being a Richardson and with my family’s achievements, I will be likely to invest some time and energy in raising my children to a standard befitting a Richardson.

It’s in a woman’s interests to draw her husband into such a high-level investment in his children - which perhaps partly explains why so few women, even modern feminist-type women, object to taking their husband’s name on marriage.

I also disagree with John’s acceptance of the term sex worker. This term was introduced to try to reduce the social stigma applied to prostitution. The term is meant to suggest that prostitution is just another variety of work, albeit one involving sex.

Applying a social stigma is a good, non-violent, non-statist way for a community to uphold its moral standards. It doesn’t prevent us from pitying a prostitute but it does keep her activities as something unrespectable or even “dirty” - which hopefully helps to keep some women away from it.

Posted by Pericles on June 30, 2005, 02:33 AM | #

Surnames in Iceland are unusual.
From http://www.ling.gu.se/projekt/sprakfrageladan/english/varldskarta/eng-isl.html

“Icelandic surnames are also quite special. Surnames, which exist from generation to generation in other European cultures, are rare in Iceland. In Iceland, the father’s first name is used as the base to the child’s last name. For example, Baldur Þórsson and Freyja Óðinsdóttir have two children, Kristín and Björn. The children’s last names would be Kristín Baldursdóttir and Björn Baldursson. It is also possible to make a last name using the name of the mother, but it is uncommon.

The same naming tradition existed in Sweden and Norway until the second part of the 19th century. In certain areas of western Sweden, it continued even longer.”

Pericles

Posted by jonjayray on June 30, 2005, 07:41 PM | #

The Nordic use of patronymics was in fact discontnued only by force of law in Denmark—about 100 years ago. Mostly people just adopterd their patronymic as a surname—which is why there are relatively few surnames in Denmark. Though I believe that “Mohammed” and “Ali” are becoming common

Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 30, 2005, 09:10 PM | #

“Though I believe that ‘Mohammed’ and ‘Ali’ are becoming common”

John couldn’t resist throwing that last bit in ... he just could not resist ....You can see in your mind’s eye the sense of satisfaction emanating from him, radiating from him, surrounding him like a warm glow, as he typed that little coda. Right, John, plunge the knife in, yes ... and be sure to twist ...

As a matter of fact, aren’t “Mohammed” and “Ali” due to become less common, as the Danes go forward with the implementation of their new get-tough policies on Moslem immigrants? It’s as if John’s trying to discourage them before they even start. Don’t be so quick to jump to conclusions, John ... Trying to bring about a self-fulfilling prophesy by the old technique of going round claiming that what folk want to avoid—in this case, population/race change for poor Denmark—is already a done-deal so why resist? Not nice, John ... that’s bordering on sneaky, in fact ...

Any Danes reading that comment by John needn’t pay any attention ...

Posted by Guessedworker on July 01, 2005, 09:57 AM | #

Fred,

Messing about with strict rules for newcomers, marriage, family reunion and illegals already hiding someplace won’t alter the outcome - only the timing.

Immigrant numbers won’t actually fall until the native people realise they can demand it politically. The first step along the way is to insist that the nation is not propositional but is an entity based on blood and history.

Posted by jonjayray on July 04, 2005, 05:34 AM | #

“John couldn’t resist throwing that last bit in ... he just could not resist ....You can see in your mind’s eye the sense of satisfaction emanating from him, radiating from him, surrounding him like a warm glow, as he typed that little coda. Right, John, plunge the knife in, yes ... and be sure to twist ... “

Fred
You are completely right about that. I cannot resist a tease

Next entry: School Loans Paid Off

Previous entry: Ethanol From Cellulose: Prospects And Implications

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Controlled Opposition

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Whites in Africa