[Ads-l] Berkeley and gender neutral words

[Amy West]

The one I had the most quizzical reaction to was clipping "Journeyman" 
to "Journey," only because that may be ambiguous. Is that already done 
as an informal shortening in the trade training system?

---Amy West

On 7/19/19 00:00, ADS-L automatic digest system wrote:
> Date:    Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:40:23 +0000
> From:    "Baker, John"<JBAKER at STRADLEY.COM>
> Subject: Re: Berkeley and gender neutral words
>
> I had to take a minute to see the problem with “heirs.”  While the gendered word “heiress” does exist, that’s really more of a social term; the legal term is gender-neutral “heir.”  And “beneficiaries” does not have the identical meaning, as it does not include heirs at law (those who take without a will).  But I suppose language can change in a good cause, and lawyers will still find a way to differentiate between heirs at law and beneficiaries under a will.
>
> I thought at first that Berkeley was being a bit behind the times, since the struggle to minimize gendered terms stretches back for decades.  But apparently the city is also trying to support nonbinary genders; hence the opposition to “pregnant woman,” which previously would have been seen as unproblematic.
>
> I haven’t figured out yet how replacing “maiden” with “family” makes sense, or for that matter why “maiden” is in the city code.  Probably the answer to either of those questions would also answer the other.
>
>
> John Baker

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