Re: man and mankind

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Mike Noon: "World Peace Society Project"
• Previous message: Hugh W Jarvis: "Re: Keep this off anthro-l!!"
• Maybe in reply to: stephanie m huelster: "man and mankind"

On Apr 10, Stephanie Huelster wrote:

>I would like to add for the record _ Hey Man ! I don't want to be called 'a
>man' under any circumstances, yet I am not offended by being part of the
>species 'man' or 'mankind', I don't feel offended by someone referring to
>our species in this way. I feel inherently included by being able to
>comprehend their meaning as a member of the species. Man ! this is getting
>slightly out of hand.

Here's another instance where the feminist agenda to control the
language has not captivated all females. Stephanie thinks for herself
as an intelligent individual. She is responding to some femicop
coercion. She later gives good anecdotal examples to point out the
need to use the same language as the rest of society and ends by
putting the issue in its proper perspective. Her post offers wise and
sound advise.


>... A far more powerful idea seems to be that we
>are not excluded, how can we ever really be excluded from the species ?

This gets to the heart of the matter- in more ways than one!

• Next message: Mike Noon: "World Peace Society Project"
• Previous message: Hugh W Jarvis: "Re: Keep this off anthro-l!!"
• Maybe in reply to: stephanie m huelster: "man and mankind"