> Hmm, it saddens me to see people actually expressing opinions like this in a way that appears authoritative.
I was happy to read his opinion, it changes from the usual PC stuff, and the annoying uppercasing can be explained by the boldness of the claim: that Women are actually different than Men, in such a way that one of the result is they are less inclined to mess for hours, days, years with lines of computer language just to prove one theory of theirs.
As a side note, I am very annoyed when I read PC code like the boss "she", or alterning "he" and "she" in tech docs in fields where obviously the concerned people are 80% guys. In 50 years our readers will think we had problems with the reality and language: we seem to have forgotten that the language basically describes reality, it doesn't make it happen, except for those who believe in magic (hope not too many here are in this case).
Why is it wrong that occasionally manuals use a "she" to describe somebody? Is "she" an inherently wrong default position to take as opposed to "he"? Even if 4 out of 5 times it's a guy, why not suggest that perhaps it'll be a girl sometimes?
I personally use "they", because I'm a badass linguistic prescriptivist who's fine with using a neutral plural to indicate singular. But I don't see a problem with stopping the male singular from being the default. Language describes reality, but it also defines it; languages that assume maleness as a default suggest to its users that maleness is the superior form to take. I don't think it's a particularly devastating result of language, but I also don't think it's particularly annoying for women to ask that they not be diminished by the language. If it doesn't mean anything, why not just alternate it and not raise a fuss?
(I draw the line at stuff like "womyn", though, because that's when for me it becomes noticeably silly.)
I know it has been. But I don't agree that just because that's the tradition means we should go on with it. I see nothing wrong with using "she" as the default sometimes, and quite a few reasons why sticking to "he" might not be the best thing.
The only point I can think of, and which I tend to agree with, is that when you do it you make a big fuss about the gender of the person and that distracts from the actual content that you are writing about. So opponents of using "she" as the default sometimes may be simply annoyed that the author is, instead of just using the already established convention, breaking convention in a noticeable way that might distract from the real content of the document.
Language is nothing but but a traditional set of noises we make. You can decide to start calling coffee "fngelriu," but it's disingenuous then to act surprised when people think you're being deliberately obtuse.
I was happy to read his opinion, it changes from the usual PC stuff, and the annoying uppercasing can be explained by the boldness of the claim: that Women are actually different than Men, in such a way that one of the result is they are less inclined to mess for hours, days, years with lines of computer language just to prove one theory of theirs.
As a side note, I am very annoyed when I read PC code like the boss "she", or alterning "he" and "she" in tech docs in fields where obviously the concerned people are 80% guys. In 50 years our readers will think we had problems with the reality and language: we seem to have forgotten that the language basically describes reality, it doesn't make it happen, except for those who believe in magic (hope not too many here are in this case).