Chairman or chairwoman?

[Jonathan Lighter]

"Aviatrix," like "actress" but evidently unlike "editrix," is widely condemned as "demeaning to women."   How does one tell whether a [+feminine] term is "demeaning" or "empowering"?

  You look it up on a list of rigidly neo-Whorfian taboos deduced by an enthusiast who knows what evil lurks within the heart of English. Words, remember, "speak us."  Content and intent mean nothing. Phallophores must be taught to recognize what they really mean -  not what they think they mean - though we're also supposed to know that all so-called "meaning" is illusory and manipulative.

  Personally, I've never heard of anybody actually using or interpreting "actress" (to pick an ex.) as a slur, which is what "demeaning" entails. It's just something you're supposed to feel and believe even if you don't. And if you don't - baby, you're no good.

  BTW, those who don't like singular "they," have been brainwashed by an earlier form of essentialism. There's nothing inherently plural in the sound of "they."

  Have I ever mentioned the argument that English (and presumably all languages) needs five singular pronouns to match the "five genders" of real life ?  Fewer such forms tie us to the illusion that the two sexes of patriarchal biology are the chief determinants of individual identity.  I forget which scholars offered this suggestion, but they appeared to be serious. If you accepted certain premisses, their logic was impeccable.


  JL


GLL <guy1656 at OPUSNET.COM> wrote:
  ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
Sender: American Dialect Society
Poster: GLL
Subject: Re: Chairman or chairwoman?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

: Wilson Gray
:
: Let's simply spread the use of the English equivalent of Latin _vir_,

I think it's easier to push back by preserving what we already use
successfully ('he' is fine for a singular, gender indeterminate pronoun) than
to invent something new and cumbersome to replace something which is new and
equally inappropriate

My wife and I both find 'they' as a singular jarring, and when the subject is
broached we respond that it's still acceptable in English grammar for the
masculine to subsume the feminine. Personally when I see 'they' as a singular
my evaluation of the writer's maturity and subject competence drops sharply.

I also take 'points off' for writers who mix up 'blond' and 'blonde.'

As for 'actor/actress,' there was a comedian about 25 years ago who dug into
these gendered words; he asked whether an oyster should pine for his
oystress.

I don't think I would use 'editrix' or 'aviatrix' in my own natural, informal
speaking, but as a nautical term I *might* try 'pilotess' if the subject
arose.

- GLL

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org



---------------------------------
Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the  new Yahoo.com

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org