Hear Me Roar
This week's paper carried an article listing items being proposed by the Charter Review Board. Among the proposed changes, varying in degrees of sensibility, was the non-sensible suggestion that the charter's language itself be altered to a more "gender neutral" one by substituting "he or she" and "him or her" whenever plain old "he" or "him" appear. Groan. I believe most reasonable intelligent and educated people know that context is important in all forms of communication, and so I find this proposal insulting.
Sigh. As if I am an ignoramus. As if I have to point this out, and clearly, I must. Excuse me while I proceed to insult 90% of the population. The male pronouns "he" and "him" (as well as "his") can refer to one particular male, or they can refer to a male or female when the audience or reader is unknown or unclear. It all depends on the context, which is nearly always clear. So, in trying heroically to make things oh-so-popularly gender neutral, using "he or she" actually makes things more gender specific. Not to mention leaving out those few folks among us who identify with neither gender.
A a woman, I am tired of being pandered to for some imaginary indignation on my part for being left out of humanity whenever I see the pronoun "he" all by itself. I know the difference between the uses of that pronoun, and all other pronouns for that matter, and I am weary of the condescension. In addition, I find being forced to read such "gender neutral" writing utterly fatiguing.
It's unnecessary and a silly waste of time to rewrite the charter because perhaps a few women might feel left out. I have a feeling that those few women who feel that way really don't feel left out, but are trying to be modern or in fashion because someone told them they should feel snubbed.
Women are not stupid. We can think for ourselves. We know how to use pronouns. The Charter Review Board should not waste my tax dollars on changing the charter. This proposal belongs in the trash.
Sigh. As if I am an ignoramus. As if I have to point this out, and clearly, I must. Excuse me while I proceed to insult 90% of the population. The male pronouns "he" and "him" (as well as "his") can refer to one particular male, or they can refer to a male or female when the audience or reader is unknown or unclear. It all depends on the context, which is nearly always clear. So, in trying heroically to make things oh-so-popularly gender neutral, using "he or she" actually makes things more gender specific. Not to mention leaving out those few folks among us who identify with neither gender.
A a woman, I am tired of being pandered to for some imaginary indignation on my part for being left out of humanity whenever I see the pronoun "he" all by itself. I know the difference between the uses of that pronoun, and all other pronouns for that matter, and I am weary of the condescension. In addition, I find being forced to read such "gender neutral" writing utterly fatiguing.
It's unnecessary and a silly waste of time to rewrite the charter because perhaps a few women might feel left out. I have a feeling that those few women who feel that way really don't feel left out, but are trying to be modern or in fashion because someone told them they should feel snubbed.
Women are not stupid. We can think for ourselves. We know how to use pronouns. The Charter Review Board should not waste my tax dollars on changing the charter. This proposal belongs in the trash.
Comments
Post a Comment