Ok, I wasn't going to say another word on the subject but since my post on
this issue got addressed, I *have* to.

I said:
>> Er, the only suggestion I can offer here is the only one that I use for
>> myself personally, when confronted with a gender-specific pronoun used in
>> an impersonal sense.
>>
>> I just don't wrap so much of my self image up in what someone else
>> impersonally used as a pronoun when writing a manual.  And I save my anger
>> for those who MEANT to insult me.

Joe Clark Replied:
>By that logic, no writing other than personal correspondence would
>ever be subject to change or evolution,

Please explain this logic.  I fail to grasp how simply having a more solid
sense of self esteem and a more well-defined self image than can be either
strengthened or undermined by a *listserv manual* affects the change or
evolution of the English language.  By this logic, the only useful change
comes about as a resort of revolution and that is not the case.  Words like
"cellular" (as in phone) or "beeper" did not come about because someone had
a point to make, they came about because they were useful descriptives that
fell into common usage.  The English language evolves in response to a
great many other social pressures than revolution and I have to admit I
don't find it particularly accurate to assume that as a thinking, rational
human being I am only capable of change and growth when forced to by social
revolution.  That's balderdash, and insulting. ;)

>because everything else you
>read wasn't *meant* to insult you.

How do you draw this conclusion from what I said?  This is a bit of a
reach.  I said I save my anger for those who MEANT to insult me.  MEANING
to insult me doesn't require personal correspondence.  I recall once
finding a book in a library that purported to show women how to manage
thier finances.  The practical upshot of the book (published in the 1950's)
was that women lack the capacity to be financially responsible on thier
own, due to a lack of social maturity, and must therefore resort to the
practices outlined in this book to create a secure enough financial blanket
so that our "innate financial immaturity" was bypassed.  That book
irritated me to no end, because it was meant to insult me.  The writer
didn't know me and it wasn't intended as personal correspondence,
nevertheless it was intended to insult me.

>Assuming the reader is male is a
>dangerous practice. (Or female.) There are rather limited
>exceptions-- pregnancy, prostate cancer, that sort of thing.

Hmmmmm'kay, so let me get this straight.  It is, in your opinion, wrong for
me to be so strong and solid and secure in my sense of who I am, what I am
capable of and what I have accomplished that the mere use of a gender
pronoun in a *listserv manual* cannot possibly affect that sense of self or
undermine my identity and self esteem?

You have to pick your battles.  As a woman employed in a high-tech
industry, I get more than enough gender-issue hassles to cope with.  I
don't need to go looking for them where they clearly don't exist.

And Joe, please understand... I find your willingness to defend women in
the context of gender pronoun issues heartwarming.  But please, when you're
defending a class of people, it's poor form to be so condescending to an
individual member of that class.

Tiernan,
That's Ms. Tiernan To You

<0o---<>---o0<Mistress of the Wild Hunt>0o---<>---o0>
       "The Hands of the Goddess are at the ends
        of our own wrists."
                                              -- Karen Brown
<0o---<>---o0< http://www.tirnanoc.org >0o---<>---o0>
                      mhm22x21