{"id":16470,"date":"2021-10-04T19:54:43","date_gmt":"2021-10-04T23:54:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/?p=16470"},"modified":"2021-10-04T19:54:58","modified_gmt":"2021-10-04T23:54:58","slug":"implicit-bias-worksheet","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/implicit-bias-worksheet\/","title":{"rendered":"Implicit Bias Worksheet – Brian Ellsmore"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n

COPY ALL THE TEXT IN THIS POST TO YOUR OWN POST, THEN FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW.<\/h3>\n

1-USE STRIKETHROUGH<\/del> FOR EVERY INSTANCE OF BIAS IN A PERSON PAPER ON PURITY IN LANGUAGE<\/em> (BELOW)\u00a0UNTIL THE EXERCISE STOPS (IT WILL BE TIMED). \u00a0THEN COUNT HOW MANY INSTANCES YOU UNDERLINED. COMPARE WITH YOUR GROUP AND SEE IF ALL OF YOU UNDERLINED THE SAME WORDS AND WHY.<\/h4>\n

2-ALONE & WITHOUT DISCUSSION, FILL IN EACH BLANK SPACE IN THE PARAGRAPH BELOW WITH A SINGLE WORD SO THAT THE WHOLE PARAGRAPH IS COHERENT.<\/h4>\n

All children are capable of \u00a0learning \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0, but we cannot expect all students to learn \u00a0 \u00a0when far too many are \u00a0experiencing \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0stairwells with broken handrails and missing steps, tripping and falling as they \u00a0 try \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0to keep up, while others are \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 up on elevators. Equitably funded schools run by \u00a0 \u00a0 local \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0educators, buttressed by strong local, state and national educational \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 schools \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0that center the entire context of students\u2019 lives, will be the ones to improve the academic \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 of America\u2019s most economically \u00a0 \u00a0 rich \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0children. They demand multiple solutions, deep investment and political \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 .<\/p>\n

3- NOW GATHER IN A LARGER GROUP, AND RE-DO THIS PARAGRAPH SO IT HAS THE BEST WORD FOR EACH BLANK. ADD THE GROUP VERSION TO YOUR POST. COMPARE THE CHOICE TO YOUR OWN. HOW DO WORD CHOICES (AND CODE CHOICES) VARY WITH SMALL AND LARGE DIFFERENCES?<\/h4>\n

All children are capable of \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0learning \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0, but we cannot expect all students to \u00a0 \u00a0 climb \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0when far too many are \u00a0 \u00a0falling down \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 stairwells with broken handrails and missing steps, tripping and falling as they \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0attempt \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 to keep up, while others are \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0going \u00a0 \u00a0 up on elevators. Equitably funded schools run by \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0successful \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0educators, buttressed by strong local, state and national educational \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 system \u00a0 \u00a0that center the entire context of students\u2019 lives, will be the ones to improve the academic \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0success \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 of America\u2019s most economically \u00a0 \u00a0diverse \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 children. They demand multiple solutions, deep investment and political \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 .<\/p>\n

A PERSON PAPER ON PURITY IN LANGUAGE<\/h4>\n

William Satire (alias Douglas R. Hofstadter) <\/b>From Metamagical Themas: Questing for the Essence of Mind and Pattern<\/em><\/a>
\nby Douglas R. Hofstadter, Basic Books, 1985.
\n(Original web version: http:\/\/www.bloomington.in.us\/~abangert\/person.html<\/em><\/a>)<\/p>\n

It\u2019s high time someone blew the whistle on all the silly prattle about revamping our language to suit the purposes of certain political fanatics. You know what I\u2019m talking about-those who accuse speakers of English of what they call \u201cracism.\u201d<\/del> This awkward neologism, constructed by analogy with the well-established term \u201csexism,\u201d does not sit well in the ears, if I may mix my metaphors. But let us grant that in our society there may be injustices here and there in the treatment of either race from time to time, and let us even grant these people their terms \u201cracism\u201d and \u201cracist.\u201d How valid, however, are the claims of the self-proclaimed \u201cblack libbers,\u201d or \u201cnegrists\u201d-those who would radically change our language in order to \u201cliberate\u201d us poor dupes from its supposed racist bias?<\/del><\/p>\n

Most of the clamor, as you certainly know by now, revolves around the age-old usage of the noun \u201cwhite\u201d and words built from it, such as chairwhite, mailwhite, repairwhite, clergywhite, middlewhite, Frenchwhite, forewhite, whitepower, whiteslaughter, oneupuwhiteship, straw white, whitehandle, <\/i>and so on. The negrists claim that using the word \u201cwhite,\u201d either on its own or as a component, to talk about all<\/i> the members of the human species is somehow degrading to blacks and reinforces racism. Therefore the libbers propose that we substitute \u201cperson\u201d everywhere where \u201cwhite\u201d now occurs. Sensitive speakers of our secretary tongue of course find this preposterous. There is great beauty to a phrase such as \u201cAll whites are created equal.\u201d Our forebosses who framed the Declaration of Independence<\/a> well understood the poetry of our language. Think how ugly it would be to say \u201cAll persons are created equal,\u201d or \u201cAll whites and blacks are created equal.\u201d Besides, as any schoolwhitey can tell you, such phrases are redundant. In most contexts, it is self-evident when \u201cwhite\u201d is being used in an inclusive sense, in which case it subsumes members of the darker race just as much as fairskins.<\/p>\n

There is nothing denigrating to black people in being subsumed under the rubric \u201cwhite\u201d-no more than under the rubric \u201cperson.\u201d After all, white is a mixture of all the colors of the rainbow, including black.<\/del> Used inclusively, the word \u201cwhite\u201d has no connotations whatsoever of race. Yet many people are hung up on this point. A prime example is Abraham Moses, one of the more vocal spokeswhites for making such a shift. For years, Niss Moses, authoroon of the well-known negrist tracts A Handbook of Nonracist Writing <\/i>and Words and Blacks, <\/i>has had nothing better to do than go around the country making speeches advocating the downfall of \u201cracist language\u201d that ble objects to. But when you analyze bler objections, you find they all fall apart at the seams. Niss Moses says that words like \u201cchairwhite\u201d suggest to people-most especially impressionable young whiteys and blackeys-that all chairwhites belong to the white race. How absurd! It\u2019s quite obvious, for instance, that the chairwhite of the League of Black Voters is going to be a black, not a white. Nobody need think twice about it. As a matter of fact, the suffix \u201cwhite\u201d is usually not pronounced with a long \u201ci\u201d as in the noun \u201cwhite,\u201d but like \u201cwit,\u201d as in the terms saleswhite, freshwhite, penwhiteship, first basewhite, <\/i>and so on. It\u2019s just a simple and useful component in building race-neutral words.<\/p>\n

But Niss Moses would have you sit up and start hollering \u201cRacism!\u201d In fact, Niss Moses sees evidence of racism under every stone.<\/del> Ble has written a famous article, in which ble vehemently objects to the immortal and poetic words of the first white on the moon, Captain Nellie Strongarm. If you will recall, whis words were: \u201cOne small step for a white, a giant step for whitekind.\u201d This noble sentiment is anything but racist; it is simply a celebration of a glorious moment in the history of White.<\/p>\n

Another of Niss Moses\u2019 shrill objections is to the age-old differentiation of whites from blacks by the third-person pronouns \u201cwhe\u201d and \u201cble.\u201d Ble promotes an absurd notion: that what we really need in English is a single pronoun covering both races. Numerous suggestions have been made, such as \u201cpe,\u201d \u201ctey,\u201d and others, These are all repugnant to the nature of the English language, as the average white in the street will testify, even if whe has no linguistic training whatsoever. Then there are advocates of usages such as \u201cwhe or ble,\u201d \u201cwhis or bler,\u201d and so forth. This makes for monstrosities such as the sentence \u201cWhen the next President takes office, whe or ble will have to choose whis or bler cabinet with great care, for whe or ble would not want to offend any minorities.\u201d Contrast this with the spare elegance of the normal way of putting it, and there is no question which way we ought to speak. There are, of course, some yapping black libbers who advocate writing \u201cbl\/whe\u201d everywhere, which, aside from looking terrible, has no reasonable pronunciation. Shall we say \u201cblooey\u201d all the time when we simply mean \u201cwhe\u201d? Who wants to sound like a white with a chronic sneeze?<\/p>\n

One of the more hilarious suggestions made by the squawkers for this point of view is to abandon the natural distinction along racial lines, and to replace it with a highly unnatural one along sexual lines. One such suggestion-emanating, no doubt, from the mind of a madwhite-would have us say \u201che\u201d for male whites (and blacks) and \u201cshe\u201d for female whites (and blacks). Can you imagine the outrage with which sensible folk of either sex would greet this \u201cmodest proposal\u201d?<\/p>\n

Another suggestion is that the plural pronoun \u201cthey\u201d be used in place of the inclusive \u201cwhe.\u201d This would turn the charming proverb \u201cWhe who laughs last, laughs best\u201d into the bizarre concoction \u201cThey who laughs last, laughs best.\u201d As if anyone in whis right mind could have thought that the original proverb applied only to the white race! No, we don\u2019t need a new pronoun to \u201cliberate\u201d our minds. That\u2019s the lazy white\u2019s way of solving the pseudoproblem of racism. In any case, it\u2019s ungrammatical. The pronoun \u201cthey\u201d is a plural pronoun, and it grates on the civilized ear to hear it used to denote only one person. Such a usage, if adopted, would merely promote illiteracy and accelerate the already scandalously rapid nosedive of the average intelligence level in our society.<\/p>\n

Niss Moses would have us totally revamp the English language to suit bler purposes. If, for instance, we are to substitute \u201cperson\u201d for \u201cwhite,\u201d where are we to stop? If we were to follow Niss Moses\u2019 ideas to their logical conclusion, we would have to conclude that ble would like to see small blackeys and whiteys playing the game of \u201cHangperson\u201d and reading the story of \u201cSnow Person and the Seven Dwarfs.\u201d And would ble have us rewrite history to say, \u201cDon\u2019t shoot until you see the persons<\/i> of their eyes\u201d? Will pundits and politicians henceforth issue person papers? Will we now have egg yolks and egg persons?<\/i> And pledge allegiance to the good old Red, Person, and Blue? Will we sing, \u201cI\u2019m dreaming of a person<\/i> Christmas\u201d? Say of a frightened white, \u201cWhe\u2019s person<\/i> as a sheet!\u201d? Lament the increase of person-collar crime? Thrill to the chirping of bobpersons <\/i>in our gardens? Ask a friend to person<\/i> the table while we go visit the persons\u2019room? <\/i>Come off it, Niss Moses-don\u2019t personwash our language!<\/p>\n

What conceivable harm is there in such beloved phrases as \u201cNo white is an island,\u201d \u201cDog is white\u2019s best friend,\u201d or \u201cWhite\u2019s inhumanity to white\u201d? Who would revise such classic book titles as Bronob Jacowski\u2019s The Ascent of White <\/i>or Eric Steeple Bell\u2019s Whites of Mathematics? <\/i>Did the poet who wrote \u201cThe best-laid plans of mice and whites gang aft agley\u201d believe that blacks\u2019 plans gang ne\u2019er <\/i>agley? Surely not! Such phrases are simply metaphors: everyone can see beyond that. Whe who interprets them as reinforcing racism must have a perverse desire to feel oppressed.<\/p>\n

\u201cPersonhandling\u201d the language is a habit that not only Niss Moses but quite a few others have taken up recently For instance, Nrs. Delilah Buford has urged that we drop the useful distinction between \u201cNiss\u201d and \u201cNrs.\u201d (which, as everybody knows, is pronounced \u201cNissiz,\u201d the reason for which nobody knows!). Bler argument is that there is no need for the public to know whether a black is employed or not. Need <\/i>is, of course, not the point. Ble conveniently sidesteps the fact that there is a tradition <\/i>in our society of calling unemployed blacks \u201cNiss\u201d and employed blacks \u201cNrs.\u201d Most blacks-in fact, the vast ma jority-prefer it that way. They want <\/i>the world to know what their employment status is, and for good reason. Unemployed blacks want prospective employers to know they are available, without having to ask embarrassing questions. Likewise, employed blacks are proud of having found a job, and wish to let the world know they are employed. This distinction provides a sense of security to all involved, in that everyone knows where ble fits into the scheme of things.<\/p>\n

But Nrs. Buford refuses to recognize this simple truth. Instead, ble shiftily turns the argument into one about whites, asking why it is that whites are universally addressed as \u201cMaster,\u201d without any differentiation between employed and unemployed ones. The answer, of course, is that in America and other Northern societies, we set little store by the employment status of whites, Nrs. Buford can do little to change that reality, for it seems to be tied to innate biological differences between whites and blacks. Many white-years of research, in fact, have gone into trying to understand why it is that employment status matters so much to black, yet relatively little to whites. It is true that both races have a longer life expectancy if employed, but of course people often do not act so as to maximize their life expectancy. So far, it remains a mystery. In any case, whites and blacks clearly have different constitutional inclinations, and different goals in life. And so I say, Vive na diff\u00e9rence!<\/i><\/p>\n

As for Nrs. Buford\u2019s suggestion that both \u201cNiss\u201d and \u201cNrs.\u201d be unified into the single form of address \u201cNs.\u201d (supposed to rhyme with \u201cfizz\u201d), all I have to say is, it is arbitrary and clearly a thousand years ahead of its time. Mind you, this \u201cNs. \u201d is an abbreviation concocted out of thin air: it stands for absolutely nothing. Who ever heard of such toying with language? And while we\u2019re on this subject, have you yet run across the recently founded Ns.<\/i> magazine, dedicated to the concerns of the \u201cliberated black\u201d? It\u2019s sure to attract the attention of a trendy band of black airheads for a little while, but serious blacks surely will see through its thin veneer of slick, glossy Madison Avenue approaches to life.<\/p>\n

Nrs. Buford also finds it insultingly asymmetric that when a black is employed by a white, ble changes bler firmly name to whis firmly name. But what\u2019s so bad about that? Every firm\u2019s core consists of a boss (whis job is to make sure long-term policies are well charted out) and a secretary (bler job is to keep corporate affairs running smoothly on a day-to-day basis). They are both equally important and vital to the firm\u2019s success. No one disputes this. Beyond them there may of course be other firmly members. Now it\u2019s quite obvious that all members of a given firm should bear the same firmly name-otherwise, what are you going to call the firm\u2019s products? And since it would be nonsense for the boss to change whis name, it falls to the secretary to change bler name. Logic, not racism, dictates this simple convention.<\/p>\n

What puzzles me the most is when people cut off their nose to spite their faces. Such is the case with the time-honored colored suffixes \u201coon\u201d and \u201croon,\u201d found in familiar words such as ambassadroon, stewardoon, and sculptroon. <\/i>Most blacks find it natur al and sensible to add those suffixes onto -nouns such as \u201caviator\u201d or \u201cwaiter.\u201d A black who flies an airplane may proudly proclaim, \u201cI\u2019m an aviatroon!\u201d But it would sound silly, if not ridiculous, for a black to say of blerself, \u201cI work as a waiter.\u201d On the other hand, who could object to my saying that the lively Ticely Cyson is a great actroon, or that the hilarious Quill Bosby is a great comedioon? You guessed it-authoroons such as Niss Mildred Hempsley and Nrs. Charles White, both of whom angrily reject the appellation \u201cauthoroon,\u201d deep though its roots are in our language. Nrs. White, perhaps one of the finest poetoons of our day, for some reason insists on being known as a \u201cpoet.\u201d It leads on to wonder, is Nrs. White ashamed <\/i>of being black, perhaps? I should hope not. White needs Black, and Black needs White, and neither race should feel ashamed.<\/p>\n

Some extreme negrists object to being treated with politeness and courtesy by whites. For example, they reject the traditional notion of \u201cNegroes first,\u201d preferring to open doors for themselves, claiming that having doors opened for them suggest implicitly that society considers them inferior. Well, would they have it the other way? Would these incorrigible grousers prefer to open doors for whites? What do blacks want?<\/p>\n

Another unlikely word has recently become a subject of controversy: \u201cblackey.\u201d This is, of course, the ordinary term for black children (including teenagers), and by affectionate extension it is often applied to older blacks. Yet, incredible though it seems, many blacks-even teen-age blackeys-now claim to have had their \u201cconsciousness raised,\u201d and are voguishly skittish about being called \u201cblackeys.\u201d Yet it\u2019s as old as the hills for blacks employed in the same office to refer to themselves as \u201cthe office blackeys,\u201d And for their superior to call them \u201cmy blackeys\u201d helps make the ambiance more relaxed and comfy for all. It\u2019s hardly the mortal insult that libbers claim it to be. Fortunately, most blacks are sensible people and realize that mere words do not demean; they know it\u2019s how they are used <\/i>that counts. Most of the time, calling a black-especially an older black-a \u201cblackey\u201d is a thoughtful way of complimenting bler, making bler feel young, fresh, and hirable again. Lord knows, I certainly wouldn\u2019t object if someone told me that I looked whiteyish these days!<\/p>\n

Many young blackeys go through a stage of wishing they had been born white. Perhaps this is due to popular television shows like Superwhite and Batwhite<\/i>, but it doesn\u2019t really matter. It is perfectly normal and healthy. Many of our most successful blacks were once tomwhiteys and feel no shame about it. Why should they? Frankly, I think tomwhiteys are often the cutest little blackeys-but that\u2019s just my opinion. In any case, Niss Moses (once again) raises a ruckus on this score, asking why we don\u2019t have a corresponding word for young whiteys who play blackeys\u2019 games and generally manifest a desire to be black. Well, Niss Moses, if this were a common phenomenon, we most assuredly would have such a word, but it just happens not to be. Who can say why? But given that tomwhiteys are a dime a dozen, it\u2019s nice to have a word for them. The lesson is that White must learn to fit language to reality; White cannot manipulate the world by manipulating mere words. An elementary lesson, to be sure, but for some reason Niss Moses and others of bler ilk resist learning it.<\/p>\n

Shifting from the ridiculous to the sublime, let us consider the Holy Bible. The Good Book is of course the source of some of the most beautiful language and profound imagery to be found anywhere. And who is the central character of the Bible? I am sure I need hardly remind you; it is God. As everyone knows, Whe is male and white, and that is an indisputable fact. <\/b>But have you heard the latest joke promulgated by tasteless negrists? It is said that one of them died and went to Heaven and then returned. What did ble report? \u201cI have seen God, and guess what? Ble\u2019s female!\u201d Can anyone say that this is not blasphemy of the highest order? It just goes to show that some people will stoop to any depths in order to shock. I have shared this \u201cjoke\u201d with a number of friends of mine (including several blacks, by the way), and, to a white, they have agreed that it sickens them to the core to see Our Lord so shabbily mocked. Some things are just in bad taste, and there are no two ways about it. It is scum like this who are responsible for some of the great problems in our society today, I am sorry to say.<\/p>\n

Well, all of this is just another skirmish in the age-old Battle of the Races, I guess, and we shouldn\u2019t take it too seriously. I am reminded of words spoken by the great British philosopher Alfred West Malehead in whis commencement address to my alma secretaria <\/i>the University of North Virginia: \u201cTo enrich the language of whites is, certainly, to enlarge the range of their ideas.\u201d I agree with this admirable sentiment wholeheartedly. I would merely point out to the overzealous that there are some extravagant notions about language that should be recognized for what they are: cheap attempts to let dogmatic, narrow minds enforce their views on the speakers lucky enough to have inherited the richest, most beautiful and flexible language on earth, a language whose traditions run back through the centuries to such deathless poets as Milton, Shakespeare, Wordsworth, Keats, Walt Whitwhite, and so many others\u2026 Our language owes an incalculable debt to these whites for their clarity of vision and expression, and if the shallow minds of bandwagon-jumping negrists succeed in destroying this precious heritage for all whites of good will, that will be, without any doubt, a truly female day in the history of Northern White.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Post Scriptum<\/p>\n

Perhaps this piece shocks you. It is meant to. The entire point of it is to use something that we find shocking as leverage to illustrate the fact that something that we usually close our eyes to is also very shocking. The most effective way I know to do so is to develop an extended analogy with something known as shocking and reprehensible. Racism is that thing, in this case. I am happy with this piece, despite-but also because of-its shock value. I think it makes its point better than any factual article could. As a friend of mine said, \u201cIt makes you so uncomfortable that you can\u2019t ignore it.\u201d I admit that rereading it makes even me, the author, uncomfortable! Numerous friends have warned me that in publishing this piece I am taking a serious risk of earning myself a reputation as a terrible racist. I guess I cannot truly believe that anyone would see this piece that way. To misperceive it this way would be like calling someone a vicious racist for telling other people \u201cThe word \u2018nigger\u2019 is extremely offensive.\u201d If allusions <\/i>to racism, especially for the purpose of satirizing racism and its cousins, are confused with racism itself, then I think it is time to stop writing.<\/p>\n

Some people have asked me if to write this piece, I simply took a genuine William Safire column (appearing weekly in the New<\/i> York Times Magazine <\/i>under the title \u201cOn Language\u201d) and \u201cfiddled\u201d with it. That is far from the truth. For years I have collected examples of sexist language, and in order to produce this piece, I dipped into this collection, selected some of the choicest, and ordered them very carefully. \u201cTranslating\u201d them into this alternate world was sometimes extremely difficult, and some words took weeks. The hardest terms of all, surprisingly enough, were \u201cNiss,\u201d \u201cNrs.,\u201d and \u201cNs.,\u201d even though \u201cMaster\u201d came immediately. The piece itself is not based on any particular article by William Safire, but Safire has without doubt been one of the most vocal opponents of nonsexist language reforms, and therefore merits being safired upon.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, Master Safire has recently spoken out on sexism in whis column (August 5, 1984). Lamenting the inaccuracy of writing either \u201cMrs. Ferraro\u201d or \u201cMiss Ferraro\u201d to designate the Democratic vice-presidential candidate whose husband\u2019s name is \u201cZaccaro,\u201d whe writes:<\/p>\n

It breaks my heart to suggest this, but the time has come for Ms. <\/i>We are no longer faced with a theory, but a condition. It is unacceptable for journalists to dictate to a candidate that she call herself Miss<\/i> or else use her married name; it is equally unacceptable for a candidate to demand that newspapers print a blatant inaccuracy by applying a married honorific to a maiden name.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

How disappointing it is when someone finally winds up doing the right thing but for the wrong reasons! In Safire\u2019s case, this shift was entirely for journalistic rather than humanistic reasons! It\u2019s as if Safire wished that women had never entered the political ring, so that the Grand Old Conventions of English-good enough for our grandfathers- would never have had to be challenged. How heartless of women! How heartbreaking the toll on our beautiful language!<\/p>\n

A couple of weeks after I finished this piece, I ran into the book The Nonsexist Communicator, <\/i>by Bobbye Sorrels. In it, there is a satire called \u201cA Tale of Two Sexes,\u201d which is very interesting to compare with my \u201cPerson Paper,\u201d Whereas in mine, I slice the world orthogonally to the way it is actually sliced and then perform a mapping of worlds to establish a disorienting yet powerful new vision of our world, in hers, Mrs. Sorrels simply reverses the two halves of our world as it is actually sliced. Her satire is therefore in some ways very much like mine, and in other ways extremely different. It should be read.<\/p>\n

I do not know too many publications that discuss sexist language in depth. The finest I have come across are the aforementioned Handbook of Nonsexist Writing, <\/i>by Casey Miller and Kate Swift; Words and Women, <\/i>by the same authors; Sexist Language: A Modern Philosophical Analysis<\/i>, edited by Mary Vetterling-Braggin; The Nonsexist Communicator, <\/i>by Bobbye Sorrels; and a very good journal titled Women and Language News. <\/i>Subscriptions are available at Centenary College of Louisiana, 2911 Centenary Boulevard, Shreveport, Louisiana 71104.<\/p>\n

My feeling about nonsexist English is that it is like a foreign language that I am learning. I find that even after years of practice, I still have to translate sometimes from my native language, which is sexist English. I know of no human being who speaks Nonsexist as their native tongue. It will be very interesting to see if such people come to exist. If so, it will have taken a lot of work by a lot of people to reach that point.<\/p>\n

One final footnote: My book G\u00f6del, Escher, Bach, <\/i>whose dialogues were the source of my very first trepidations about my own sexism, is now being translated into various languages, and to my delight, the Tortoise, a green-blooded male if ever there was one in English, is becoming Madame Tortue <\/i>in <\/i>French, Signorina Ttirtaruga <\/i>in Italian, <\/b>and so on. Full circle ahead!<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

COPY ALL THE TEXT IN THIS POST TO YOUR OWN POST, THEN FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW. 1-USE STRIKETHROUGH FOR EVERY INSTANCE OF BIAS IN A PERSON PAPER ON PURITY IN LANGUAGE (BELOW)\u00a0UNTIL THE EXERCISE STOPS (IT WILL BE TIMED). \u00a0THEN COUNT HOW MANY INSTANCES YOU More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":115,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[163,170],"class_list":["post-16470","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-163","tag-classwork"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pahVQP-4hE","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16470","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/115"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16470"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16470\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16612,"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16470\/revisions\/16612"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16470"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16470"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jolineblais.net\/nmd200\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16470"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}