Dunno - but it probably had something to do with lefties all being bad
people who murder nuns if the Daily Mail was involved
--On 30 March 2006 16:38 +0100 Steven Cummins <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
> Can anyone tell me what the 'key facts to be lost' were according to the
> Daily Mail, as per the original comment. I think that got lost somewhat...
>
> Steve
> --
> Dr Steven Cummins
> MRC Fellow
> Department of Geography
> Queen Mary, University of London
> Mile End Road
> London E1 4NS
>
> Tel: 020 7882 5400
> Fax: 020 8981 6276
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> Quoting Rachel Pain <[log in to unmask]>:
>
>> "Woperchild" may sound unusual as it isn't in wide common use in the
>> English language.
>>
>> "Human made" does not, and is.
>>
>> Simple! As I think most non-sexist, non-racist language is.
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: A forum for critical and radical geographers
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dr Hillary Shaw
>> Sent: 30 March 2006 10:22
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Geog - genderde language
>>
>> This point may highlight a boundary that is hard to detect between true,
>> and certainly correct, attempts, to eliminate discrimmination (by sex,
>> race, disabliity, etc etc) and the sometimes-bordering-on-the-absurd
>> ''language'' of what has been termed political correctness. Yes,
>> language itself can be very powerful - the 'Power of Naming', - but
>> potential absurdity is ilustrated by the ultimate non-discrimminatory
>> term for a female of the homo sapiens species - woperchild. Can't say
>> wo-man, so wo-person, ooops 'son' is also sexist, so child instead.
>>
>> Here we may actually have a negative Power of Naming effect, such
>> absurdities taking away from the worthiness of all anti-discrimmination
>> efforts.
>>
>> So what should we use as shorthand for something that has been made by
>> homo sapiens. Anthropogenic is a bit long, 'of human origin' is even
>> longer still, person-made sounds silly, perchild-made even more so.
>> 'Mankind' used to refer to all 6.6 bn people on the planet, tho
>> admittedly potential sex-bias here, but should we now use personkind,
>> homo sapiens, or what?
>>
>> Dr Hillary J. Shaw
>> School of Geography
>> University of Southampton
>> Highfield
>> Southampton
>> SO17 1BJ
>> www.fooddeserts.org <http://www.fooddeserts.org/>
>>
>> In a message dated 30/03/2006 03:06:35 GMT Daylight Time,
>> [log in to unmask] writes:
>> One would hope that by now, in 2006, at least we as geographers
>> could
>> refrain from gendered language - do people really still use the
>> term 'man
>> made'?? - point 4. Feminist geography has been around for a good
>> while now
>> - arguments about the power of language are not new.
>>
>> Tracey Skelton
>>
|