advancing changes in language: removing gender bias in words. you give here examples.

hi all.

the secretary at the front desk corrected me on a word. I was using "mankind" to describe the human race.
she told me that the correct word is,
"humankind"!

here:

dailycaller.com...

A student at Northern Arizona University (NAU) was actually docked marks on an English assignment because she used the word “mankind” in her essay instead of a “gender-neutral” option.

Caitlin Jeffers is an English major at NAU. She related to Campus Reform how she received an email from her professors Dr. Anne Scott, who informed Jeffers that she had lost one point out of a possible 50 for “problems with diction (word choice)” related to her use of the word “mankind” when she should have used “humanity.”

“The words we use matter very much, or else teachers would not be making an issue of this at all,” she wrote.

“I would be negligent, as a professor who is running a class about the human condition and the assumptions we make about being ‘human,’ if I did not also raise this issue of gendered language and ask my students to respect the need for gender-neutral language,” Scott explained.

=======

uncle freestone says.....

the other day someone told me how in her church they now have re-written all of their hymns to be gender neutral.

I also note that sometimes I "catch myself" going along with the PC changes.
it is like a slow tidal change, it is in the air.

I expect that in , within, ten years, a third of our language might change..
'like maybe the word "BLACK" might be banned! "black" used in all manners.
---no more black crayons.

what are your examples of extreme PC in language changes?!

freestone

a reply to: freestonew

Doesn't huMANkind pose the same problem?

Nutty, imo.

Not really directed at gender "fixing" but still a classic:

a reply to: freestonew

Just pointing out.... Why is it always the women who are crying about gender identity, fluidity, using "preferred pronouns", correcting everything everybody says..... Yet when someone refers to a vehicle, boat, bike, plane, etc., it's always a "she", and no one ever has a problem with that?

It's freggin mankind.

Both man and woMAN.

Commonality.

It isn't 'sexist'.

Idiocy. Pure and simple.

Hey, that was fairly gender neutral, wasn't it?

If & when I die, I now know I will be rolling over in my grave. Cussing at the top of my dead lungs.

The larger issue here is that both Humankind and Mankind are exclusionary and therefor offensive to animals that might identify as human, like my dog.

a reply to: sooth

Yes!

And I am considering spending thousands of dollars to give myself claws and more hair to make myself look how I feel!

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: freestonew

Just pointing out.... Why is it always the women who are crying about gender identity, fluidity, using "preferred pronouns", correcting everything everybody says..... Yet when someone refers to a vehicle, boat, bike, plane, etc., it's always a "she", and no one ever has a problem with that?

My girlfriend's car is a boy. She named him Liam. It's a Nissan.

After about a week, I got it. "Liam Nissan".

Maybe PC language isn't going far enough yet.

Why isn't trash collected by garbagepersons?

Why aren't shootings committed by gunpersons?

Why don't we call repairpersons to fix appliances?

Why don't we use personhole covers to access sewers?

a reply to: freestonew

I'm not a native English speaker and it actually made me go "hm" that your words are men-centerd. Male/female, man/woman... but I was younger and got over it.
I mean society seems to be at a pretty good place if those are the topics causing outrage. Or it's an easy deflection from real issues, depending on where you land on the conspiracy scale.

a reply to: Peeple

Maybe because it's a form of universal communication that everyone can understand regardless of native tongue?

Just breaking.

Nasa just recalled the voyager probe because the plague was offensive to the 60 some odd labels we now have to a persons sex.

originally posted by: sooth
like my dog.

If your dog is a female, is that "bitchkind".

To the OP.

The English language is glorious. Complex, rich and deep. Why do people who purport to be intelligent want to reduce the language to fewer "acceptable" words. Once gender-expression has been removed from the language, what next? Offensive colours, so removal of the word "purple" so as not to offend some group who think this, that and the other.

It's Mankind, and Humankind and (yes) Womankind. It's Humanity and Society. It's a hundred other words. These are coverall words. Why are people so offended all the time by English. Why do people always want to dumb down? WEhy is the argument so intellectually broken?

a reply to: Abysha

My Fiance has a Nissan Murano. She named her "Sandy", because she lives on a dirt road, is of golden color, and is constantly covered in dirt

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
Maybe PC language isn't going far enough yet.

Why isn't trash collected by garbagepersons?

Why aren't shootings committed by gunpersons?

Why don't we call repairpersons to fix appliances?

Why don't we use personhole covers to access sewers?

Maybe it's because language is very much a generational thing. I used garbage people, repair person, and sewer grate. I do use gunman, but that's probably just because I haven't been exposed to enough women committing gun crimes.

originally posted by: dothedew
a reply to: freestonew

Just pointing out.... Why is it always the women who are crying about gender identity, fluidity, using "preferred pronouns", correcting everything everybody says..... Yet when someone refers to a vehicle, boat, bike, plane, etc., it's always a "she", and no one ever has a problem with that?

Because men are generally the ones with more purchasing power, especially in traditional gender roles, so they objectify possessions the same way they objectify their wife. Which causes both to be referred to with female pronouns.

You can usually tell a lot about a person by listening for if they refer to possessions with he, she, or it.

a reply to: freestonew

It is more inclusive to say 'humankind', but "mankind" is not wrong or even inconsiderate to others.

Both are valid, but I suppose that even those words will fade away in a few hundred years.

Less than 1% of modern language will be part of the next linguistic incarnation in about 1000 years.

a reply to: freestonew

What an idiot this fe-male professor is - Humankind/Human denoted "male" not too long ago.

wiki

late Middle English humaine, from Old French humain(e ), from Latin humanus, from homo ‘man, human being’. The present spelling became usual in the 18th century; compare with humane