This discussion reminds me of the time, thankfully long ago, when feminists wanted to change the English word "women" to... "womyn".

I don't know if it's true or not, that the words "woman" and "women" are derived from "man" and "men", but if you think this is sexist language, then you are living in cloud-cuckoo land!

Why do people assume that just because E-o is a constructed language, it can be changed willy-nilly for political or ideological reasons? You don't like the fact that "patro"="father" and "patrino"="mother"? Tough. That's the way it is.

I don't like the way the French think that "passive" things, like tables, chairs, the moon, etc., are feminine, while "active" things like trains, guns, the sun, etc. are masculine. Tough. I want to speak French properly, and that's just the way it works.

German reformists wanted to drop the feminine suffix from words relating to professions, e.g Sekretär (male secretary) / Sekretärin (female secretary). German feminists objected, seeing it as an attack on their femininity! So, if I want to speak German well, I have to use such sexist language, it's tough, but that's just the way the language works.

Sexism is in the eye of the beholder, not the language! Leave our language alone!

Le Hibou:This discussion reminds me of the time, thankfully long ago, when feminists wanted to change the English word "women" to... "womyn".

I don't know if it's true or not, that the words "woman" and "women" are derived from "man" and "men", but if you think this is sexist language, then you are living in cloud-cuckoo land!

"woman" comes from Old English "wiffman" or wife-man (!) HOWEVER: the "man" in this compound is 'homo' NOT 'viro'...........

Le Hibou:

German reformists wanted to drop the feminine suffix from words relating to professions, e.g Sekretär (male secretary) / Sekretärin (female secretary). German feminists objected, seeing it as an attack on their femininity! So, if I want to speak German well, I have to use such sexist language, it's tough, but that's just the way the language works.

Sexism is in the eye of the beholder, not the language! Leave our language alone!

Wells' dictionary translates "Secretary" to "Sekretariino." I don't believe Wells was consciously sexist, but this wasn't one of his best moments. It was, however, an accurate reflection of the society that he was comfortable in.

I do believe that common usage is now "Sekritario," (though I just checked the Lernu vortaro, and it lists both "Sekretario" and "Sekretariino." It also translates "nurse" as both "flegisto" and "flegistino". This is as equally sexist as specifying a "male nurse" in English. Logically, there is no point in specifying the gender of the profesional unless there's some purpose to it. I think it was Gloria Alred who said, "Unless a job actually requires a penis or a vagina, it should be open to anybody." But I digress.)

The point has already been made that language is a mirror of the society that uses it, and the fact that the speakers of both Esperanto and English are struggling to make those lanuages less sexist is a good sign.

Personally, I think that it would be better, in making society less sexist, to concentrate on the REAL problems, like equal pay for equal work, sexual harrassment, rape and domestic violence, etc. before we start taking apart languages.

Worrying about whether or not a language is sexist detracts from what affects women day to day. If people are complaining about the word root for "woman" is compared to "man", then nothing gets done about what impacts most women.

I almost guarantee that the average woman working minimum wage whose boss gropes her and she's worried if she stops him she'll lose her job, is not EVEN worried about sexist language. Changing language construction wouldn't help me, say, feel safe to walk alone at night in my city.

Susan B. Anthony (a famous American early feminist who helped get women the right to vote throughout the United States)was not interested in ripping apart the language. She wanted women to have protection from abusive men, the right to choose politicians that would make a difference, and for women to have a living wage for their work.

Let's fix society before we fix language.

Shawna

Shawna:Let's fix society before we fix language.

Shawna

I don't believe you can do one without the other. If we continue on using sexist terms in language it implies that the sexism is tolerated.

The language - society connection can't be severed. The influence of language usage on the way we think and the way we teach our children to think is far to powerful.

It's because the minimum wage woman who tolerates the grope cannot spare time to think about sexism in language, we should.

And please do not assume that my concern for sexims stops with the dictionary.

Thank you!

You have a wonderful ability to get to the heart of the matter.

Shawna

waxle:I don't assume that your or anyone's concern with sexism stops with the dictionary, but there is NO REASON that a language should have additional pieces to it if it does not mechanically need them and its goal is to be as easy to learn and exception-free as possible.

We can't change the fact that "filo" means "son", nor can we change the fact that "patro" means "father", nor can we change the fact that they are inherently male.

That's the Fundamento. Can't change it even if you like talking funny in a way that conveys a political agenda.

Women are equal. I don't doubt that. But trying to change Esperanto inherently in order to make every single root inherently neutral and add a necesarry suffix compulsory in order to convey masculinity is to do nothing short of invent a new language.

Don't Ido me just because of "womyn".

No, we can't change the Fundamento. I am not in favor of adding unnecessary affixes. I am in favor eliminating them. As in the case of "sekretariino." or "flegistino." The gender affixes in these cases are unnecessary and and give no data about the quality of the professional, and have nothing to do with the Fundamento.

waxle:
Flegisto and Sekretario have already been accepted; you're preaching to the choir using those as your platform.

Regarding Flegisto and Sekretario - that was my point, that progress had been made.

But the eliminaiton of those affixes is not yet universally accepted. When I correspond with esperantists in other countries, I tell them I am an aviator and a woman, and most feel compelled to refer to me as an aviadistino. The word "aviatrix" dropped from common usage in the US, but it is far from a universal sentiment. And we are still a long, long, long way from eilininating sexism in aviation.

I have not posted any messages in favor of the "iĉo" suffix. Why did you assume I am in favor of it?

Lunombrulino:

Shawna:Let's fix society before we fix language.

Shawna

I don't believe you can do one without the other. If we continue on using sexist terms in language it implies that the sexism is tolerated.

The language - society connection can't be severed. The influence of language usage on the way we think and the way we teach our children to think is far to powerful.

It's because the minimum wage woman who tolerates the grope cannot spare time to think about sexism in language, we should.

And please do not assume that my concern for sexims stops with the dictionary.

For a newbies point of view I must agree with Shawna and the quote from Todd.

The language may have male centred words, but it is peoples interpretation of what the language should be used for that I think was in Zamenoffs mind.

The language started out in a time that had a more male bias from a work related point of view.

Before I get flamed as a sexist I do think women are equal to men. Both sexes should be treated with the same respect and opertunities.

I do not have the knowledge of Eo to favour one suffix from another, but I do hope the net and the miriad of voice / video options it has produced would allow a person to communicate with any sex or crede, via Esperanto, and not be too rail-roaded by Political correctness.

Rope:
For a newbies point of view I must agree with Shawna and the quote from Todd.

The language may have male centred words, but it is peoples interpretation of what the language should be used for that I think was in Zamenoffs mind.

The language started out in a time that had a more male bias from a work related point of view.

Before I get flamed as a sexist I do think women are equal to men. Both sexes should be treated with the same respect and opertunities.

I do not have the knowledge of Eo to favour one suffix from another, but I do hope the net and the miriad of voice / video options it has produced would allow a person to communicate with any sex or crede, via Esperanto, and not be too rail-roaded by Political correctness.

I have two points in response to this, not entirely connected.

1. Esperanto is not inherently a sexist language, but many people (and their cultures) who use it are. If we discourage the use of what I see as sexist terms, like flegistino (or [/i]aviadistino[/i]) and male nurse then we discourage sexism in our behavior. And by "discourage" I mean that we should teach by example, not mandate.

2. What a sad commentary it is that you would expect to be flamed as a sexist just because you disagree with somebody. I have not used ad hominim attacks, and do not intend to do so.