Men in America

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Pokit N

Cashing Checks & Snapping Necks!
A/V Subscriber
Sep 29, 2006
6,796
4,145
1,743
39
South Elgin, IL
#4
What this country needs more than anything are more Phil Anselmo's (sorry for the language)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD23sRyXnWA

Instead we have:
1520522612274.png
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
52,152
18,060
1,743
#7
A widely-used online writing and grammar resource for college students suggests that they find alternatives to words like “mankind” and “mailman” because such terms are “sexist.”

The Purdue University Online Writing Lab (OWL) offers a handout titled “Stereotypes and Biased Language”—which was updated just last week—that encourages students to “avoid using language that is stereotypical or biased in any way,” adding that biased language frequently occurs based on gender, “but can also offend groups of people based on sexual orientation, ethnicity, political interest, or race.”

“Writing in a non-sexist, non-biased way is both ethically sound and effective,” the OWL advises. “Non-sexist writing is necessary for most audiences; if you write in a sexist manner and alienate much of your audience from your discussion, your writing will be much less effective.”

The guide then provides examples for the “Generic Use” of non-sexist language, noting that “although MAN in its original sense carried the dual meaning of adult human and adult male, its meaning has come to be so closely identified with adult male that the generic use of MAN and other words with masculine markers should be avoided.”

Hence, instead of writing “mankind,” the OWL suggests that students write “humanity,” people,” or “human beings.”

The guide also takes issue with the word “man-made,” saying that it should be replaced with alternatives like “synthetic,” “manufactured,” or “machine-made.”

The primer then explains that students should be careful in the way they describe occupations, again suggesting that the use of “man” should be avoided for occupational terms in cases where the job can be held by a male or a female.

For instance, the OWL finds the use of the term “mailman” to be improper, preferring “mail carrier” in its place. Other terms, such as “congressman,” should also be avoided, using “congressional representative” instead.

“Historically, some jobs have been dominated by one gender or the other,” the guide concludes. “This has lead to the tendency for a person of the opposite gender to be ‘marked’ by adding a reference to gender. You should avoid marking the gender in this fashion in your writing.”

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10539


But this is simply a symtom of a bigger issue. Listen to Tucker Carlson, he gives some startling statistics.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
28,329
15,659
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#8
A widely-used online writing and grammar resource for college students suggests that they find alternatives to words like “mankind” and “mailman” because such terms are “sexist.”

The Purdue University Online Writing Lab (OWL) offers a handout titled “Stereotypes and Biased Language”—which was updated just last week—that encourages students to “avoid using language that is stereotypical or biased in any way,” adding that biased language frequently occurs based on gender, “but can also offend groups of people based on sexual orientation, ethnicity, political interest, or race.”

“Writing in a non-sexist, non-biased way is both ethically sound and effective,” the OWL advises. “Non-sexist writing is necessary for most audiences; if you write in a sexist manner and alienate much of your audience from your discussion, your writing will be much less effective.”

The guide then provides examples for the “Generic Use” of non-sexist language, noting that “although MAN in its original sense carried the dual meaning of adult human and adult male, its meaning has come to be so closely identified with adult male that the generic use of MAN and other words with masculine markers should be avoided.”

Hence, instead of writing “mankind,” the OWL suggests that students write “humanity,” people,” or “human beings.”

The guide also takes issue with the word “man-made,” saying that it should be replaced with alternatives like “synthetic,” “manufactured,” or “machine-made.”

The primer then explains that students should be careful in the way they describe occupations, again suggesting that the use of “man” should be avoided for occupational terms in cases where the job can be held by a male or a female.

For instance, the OWL finds the use of the term “mailman” to be improper, preferring “mail carrier” in its place. Other terms, such as “congressman,” should also be avoided, using “congressional representative” instead.

“Historically, some jobs have been dominated by one gender or the other,” the guide concludes. “This has lead to the tendency for a person of the opposite gender to be ‘marked’ by adding a reference to gender. You should avoid marking the gender in this fashion in your writing.”

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10539
I agree with this writing style as OWL is generally used heavily in Masters and beyond programs and there is a very good reason for this type of direction

The reason I agree with it as it is generally focused on creating outward facing documentation beyond ones own organization across cultures and in global settings. When creating these types of documents it is very wise to avoid any gender reference as it may be praised in one culture, not translate in another, or be offensive in yet another.

For Example. Man Made may come across as strong in Russia, confuse people in Finland (which has no grammatical gender), and offend countries where Men hold strong leadership positions and making something is not a Man's Job or position and the idea of men working in/with a profession/product is offensive.

When writing documents in a globalized economy in the business world, this type of writing is what OWL is referring to as to ensure a smooth translation across global lines and cultures and to ensure you can put out one message and not be required to craft multiple different communications which can confuse the message.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
66,741
48,225
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#9
The main quote i heard from her in that video 'Don't need a man'. Me thinks she got dumped and is super bitter about it.
Q: How many lesbian feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Three. One to change the bulb, one to protest the exploitation of the bulb, and one to secretly wish she was the socket.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
66,741
48,225
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#10
I agree with this writing style as OWL is generally used heavily in Masters and beyond programs and there is a very good reason for this type of direction

The reason I agree with it as it is generally focused on creating outward facing documentation beyond ones own organization across cultures and in global settings. When creating these types of documents it is very wise to avoid any gender reference as it may be praised in one culture, not translate in another, or be offensive in yet another.

For Example. Man Made may come across as strong in Russia, confuse people in Finland (which has no grammatical gender), and offend countries where Men hold strong leadership positions and making something is not a Man's Job or position and the idea of men working in/with a profession/product is offensive.

When writing documents in a globalized economy in the business world, this type of writing is what OWL is referring to as to ensure a smooth translation across global lines and cultures and to ensure you can put out one message and not be required to craft multiple different communications which can confuse the message.
What's your address? I'm sending you a hat...

1520596320040.png
 

NTXPoke

Wrangler
Jul 10, 2009
177
147
593
57
Stillwater, OK
#20
I don't understand how they can recommend using huMANity or MANufactured.

The translation must work like this--

Former--human, now - huper (because huperson is sexist.