lkista at UNM.EDU
Tue Nov 26 11:57:27 EST 1996
On Tue, 26 Nov 1996, Karen Allendoerfer wrote:
> In article <ebrown-2311962242340001 at jenkintown3.access1.dh.i-2000.net>,
> ebrown at i-2000.com (Ellie Brown) wrote:
> > Last week I attended a joint meeting of AWIS (Association for Women in
> > Science) and SWE (Society for Women Engineers) where the discussion topic
> > was Gender Equity in the Classroom. One thread involved the perceived
> > meaning of words such as "mankind" or the generic pronoun "he". The women
> > in this group were generally between 30 and 60 years old, and almost all
> > said that they had always felt included by these terms.
> Really? I never felt included by these terms.
Thank goodness there is someone else. I was beginning to think I was
weird. The funniest use of "man" or "mankind" to me
was in a graduate seminar when someone was talking about how human
papilloma virus is a causitive agent of cervical cancer *in man*.
Something else I have noticed. "Man" and "Mankind" tend to be used when
the speaker is trying to emphasize the acheivements and granduer of
humanity. I think this may harken back to Aristotilian thought where
"man"-- literally the male of our species-- was considered to be the
highest good. Woman was about three steps down in the pecking order. I
can look it up again if anyone cares.
More information about the Womenbio