Students lose marks for using 'he': Universities penalise undergrads for 'offensive' gender phrase - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=El Periodista;52052526]Not quite. They and its derivatives are, in academic and professional situations, exclusively plural. It doesn't make a ton of sense to have our only neuter-gender pronouns refer to both an individual and a group, and the subject of that requires clarifying far too often for it to be really useful. It's very important to have a pronoun that agrees in number with its subject. The "They" family works as a practical substitute, but it's far from perfect. I'm not saying this is something that would really have an effect on practical spoken language, but it'd be a nice convenience for those of us who write more than just the occasional term paper.[/QUOTE] "They" has been used as a singular pronoun for a person of indeterminate gender for over 200 years now. Which meaning is intended should be clear from context as I mentioned above.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;52052532]The irony is that TheNukeNL used a very poor choice of words to convey that some words don't matter but some do.[/QUOTE] no it's just words i frequently stroll into work and start conversation to my boss with "what up fucker" [QUOTE=TheNukeNL;52052528]No you were setting up a strawman by implying that i would advocate for no standards what so ever: See:[/QUOTE] it's not strawmanning if you attempt to reduce the point being made by saying gendered pronouns are "just words" without then realising that other words are "just words"

Please bear in mind that this news article is for a British Social Sciences school, and they are expected to be more sensitive to gender issues. This is in addition to the fact that they do a lot of writing so things like having high English standards with correct usage of pronouns is important. If something like this happened with an economics/finance or even a law course there'd be students rioting in the streets.

[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52052534]"They" has been used as a singular pronoun for a person of indeterminate gender for over 200 years now. Which meaning is intended should be clear from context as I mentioned above.[/QUOTE] Curious what your point is in arguing this. Are you just against having more granularity in our language? Just because this is the way we're doing things because we don't have a better solution doesn't mean we shouldn't try to fix things. As it stands, "They" is a catch-all for any group of mixed or singular composition, as well as any single subject of indeterminate gender. Having another word to separate these two use cases would do wonders for the specificity of the language.

[QUOTE=El Periodista;52052543]Curious what your point is in arguing this. Are you just against having more granularity in our language? Just because this is the way we're doing things because we don't have a better solution doesn't mean we shouldn't try to fix things.[/QUOTE] that argument doesn't make sense in the context of language you're not fixing something because it isn't a problem, you're adding complexity to solve nothing consider that german doesn't even have a unique word for 'she'

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52052531]mate you said that words are just words i'll say it again, have fun thinking you can say anything and hold a job that requires professionalism it's pretty staggering that you think you can say anything while supposedly working for 7 years[/QUOTE] implying working in IT requires any kind interacting with other people

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52052550]that argument doesn't make sense in the context of language you're not fixing something because it isn't a problem, you're adding complexity to solve nothing consider that german doesn't even have a unique word for 'she'[/QUOTE] Is that really an argument we can make, though? This is one of the most common stumbling blocks for second-language English speakers, especially coming from the Romance languages, because it isn't as complicated and therefore more difficult to learn. Separating these use cases would serve to smooth that transition, and likely improve efficiency in language learning for native speakers as well. Quick check, what are the virtues of introducing a new pronoun vs keeping them the same and using "They" as a stopgap? Looking for opinions here.

From now on I'm going to refer to my classes using gendered pronouns and to the users using gendered pronouns. It fills the fields then presses the submit button. She receives the request and passes sanitised data to the model - he's the guy who saves the stuff in the database.

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;52052557]implying working in IT requires any kind interacting with other people[/QUOTE] My instructors at college keep pushing in our faces that IT these days has interaction. We have 3 separate HR courses in the 2 year program because of that.

[QUOTE=El Periodista;52052561]Is that really an argument we can make, though? This is one of the most common stumbling blocks for second-language English speakers, especially coming from the Romance languages, because it isn't as complicated and therefore more difficult to learn. Separating these use cases would serve to smooth that transition, and likely improve efficiency in language learning for native speakers as well.[/QUOTE] I don't think it's as cut-and-dry as "having a specific word to refer to X makes it less complicated". If you can have a single word that refers to two things with very few issues, that's less vocabulary needed with no problem added. The reason I refer to German is because the usages of sie are [I]incredibly broad[/I] and yet context applies all the meaning required, making the language more condensed. Multiple usage cases are something that is absolutely key to English - if we didn't have it, the language would be unnecessarily massive - broadness here isn't necessarily a benefit

Can this thread be closed since A: this is thread is an inaccurate sensationalist article, and B: this thread uses trash sources, and C: this is a non-issue.

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52052531]mate you said that words are just words i'll say it again, have fun thinking you can say anything and hold a job that requires professionalism it's pretty staggering that you think you can say anything while supposedly working for 7 years[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52052537]no it's just words i frequently stroll into work and start conversation to my boss with "what up fucker"[/QUOTE] Are you really going to be this disingenuous, because you dam well know what i mean when i say "words are just words".

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;52052557]implying working in IT requires any kind interacting with other people[/QUOTE] Yes, it does. I've only done some summer placements but I absolutely had to work and interact with other people, for both work and some socialising. And trust me, all the IT people I know who've worked in the industry for decades have had to interact with people - whether they want to or not. The idea that anyone in IT or computing is a lone island is utterly ridiculous.

Censoring language is NOT to be taken lightly.

[QUOTE=TheNukeNL;52052468]When it comes to gender pronouns it should not matter [/QUOTE] Why? If I write "If anyone were to do this, then he would be given an award" vs "If anyone were to do this, then he or she would be given an award" then it is clearly incorrect because the sentence is now only true for half the population. This makes it simply [I]wrong[/I]. [editline]3rd April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Nitro836;52052615]Censoring language is NOT to be taken lightly.[/QUOTE] article the read

[QUOTE=phygon;52052619]Why? If I write "If anyone were to do this, then he would be given an award" vs "If anyone were to do this, then he or she would be given an award" then it is clearly incorrect because the sentence is now only true for half the population. This makes it simply [I]wrong[/I]. [editline]3rd April 2017[/editline] article the read[/QUOTE] From what I understand, not being able to use "he/she" has obviously been exaggerated as this only applies if there's no way you can know the gender of the person. However, there's still the issue of not being able to use words like "manpower" and "mankind", which is censorship

[QUOTE=phygon;52052619]Why? If I write "If anyone were to do this, then he would be given an award" vs "If anyone were to do this, then he or she would be given an award" then it is clearly incorrect because the sentence is now only true for half the population. This makes it simply [I]wrong[/I].[/QUOTE] I don't see the problem, you might have only used a male pronouns in your first sentence but that does not automatically exclude people of the opposite sex if you ask me. If you want to exclude them i would use a sentence something along the lines of this: "If any men does this, then he would be given an award"

What I found funny is in one of the articles, a student was penalized for using the term 'mankind' Yet the professor that penalized him sent an email where she used the word 'human' numerous times. Surely that's the exact same thing he was penalized for?

[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52052436]you didn't read the article did you this isn't about replacing gendered pronouns when you know the gender, it's about not assuming he/she when you don't know if the person is a he/she this is common sense.[/QUOTE] Is that why they're also penalizing students for using words like "manpower"? I have read the article and I'm pretty sure I understand what's going on

I think it's unprofessional to write "woman" in an essay because it has "man" in it. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52052436]you didn't read the article did you this isn't about replacing gendered pronouns when you know the gender, it's about not assuming he/she when you don't know if the person is a he/she this is common sense.[/QUOTE]It's wrong to use "manpower" too. You didn't read the article did you? [QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;52052512]Arguing that using gender-neutral language is dumb because you don't use it in IT is like arguing that learning a sailor's hitch is dumb because you don't use it in food service.[/QUOTE] Nice strawman. Shit I meant strawthey.

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;52052318]t's almost liketh language and t's meanings changes ov'r timeth[/QUOTE] although in this instance it's more prescriptivism than anything else I mean using terms like "mankind" as a gender neutral term was commonplace (and still is in many ways) around the world. [editline]3rd April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;52052388]Somebody with more knowledge explain this to me, you might not feel like you're a man or a woman, but bioligically you are one of the other unless you're 0.5% of people that fall between the gap, how can you unironically label yourself as "xi, xim, xer"? How is gender a spectrum? I understand sexuality is one but how can you be "half man half woman"[/QUOTE] gender is a spectrum because there's a lot about people that are in spectrums a statement like "humans have two legs" is actually wrong because it doesn't account for the people who have only one leg or even none at all. and then there's those who are marginal genetic cases where due to sheer happenstance they grew an extra twin or whatever and now have four "legs" (or three if it didn't grow that way). I mean honestly there's a spectrum between say 0 legs and the low hundreds at least depending on how one exactly defines a "leg" much the same applies to heads, eyes, various organs, etc because there are cases of people being born without skin or whatever and as a result you have to put people on a spectrum because that doesn't fully cover the full spectrum of the forms people take - even if they are rare and marginal cases where the people tend to die horribly or suffer from lifelong problems

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;52052329]In general, it's completely unnecessary. Say whatever the fuck you want. Use any word you want. Snigger at people who try to apply scientific etiquette to real speech. But it an official paper such as a university grade essay or a research paper, it's best to follow the rules of language if you want to look and be professional. [editline]43[/editline] It's kind of like Formal Place Setting. [img]http://i.imgur.com/Uj4zJk5.png[/img] In general, you're not going to remember all this shit or even implement it, but if you're in the field then it's best that you do.[/QUOTE] The he/she thing is understandable, if a little heavy-handed, I will not argue that. But deeming any word with "man" in it (like mankind and the like) unwanted is just baffling to me. Then again, my native language is gender-neutral by default, so maybe the significance is lost on me.

[QUOTE=codenamecueball;52052557]implying working in IT requires any kind interacting with other people[/QUOTE] people like you (who think talking to others shouldn't be a concern) when working in IT is why IT depts are hated by other depts in organisations. [editline]3rd April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;52052537]no it's just words i frequently stroll into work and start conversation to my boss with "what up fucker" [/QUOTE] If you cannot make a boss out of your friend while remain an adequate employee then it's your problem, not "professional ethics" yadda-yadda bullshit.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;52052304]Here we go. Avoiding words like mankind is incredibly standard in University writing essays. I have a book all about that encourages you to use gender neutral words in order to appear as objective as possible. Instead of mankind, pick better words such as humankind. Of course a lot of people here are exaggerating and thinking that you can't quote people anymore of they use words like "mankind", that's not how writing works. As for the rest of the garbage such as using "he" and "she"? [url]http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/dont-man-up-students-may-lose-marks-for-using-he-t356wkdrq[/url] Again, incredibly standard but over-sensationalized. I encourage everyone to do their own research on the subject instead of relying on daily mail or a trash guardian article that doesn't even link to the source paper.[/QUOTE] What kind of university do you go to. Never encoutered "cant use mankind in essays :))))" from any professor I've had.

[QUOTE=bdd458;52052827]What kind of university do you go to. Never encoutered "cant use mankind in essays :))))" from any professor I've had.[/QUOTE] I once had a professor that said "ok, write me an essay, every adjective is -5 points" edit: funnily enough the topic was not too dissimilar from the shit in OP

I get that this is bullshit, but I'm afraid plenty of people will just use news like this to fuel their shittyness and lack of morals. It seems like for a lot of people nowadays, you're either politically correct as fuck or an absolute dickhead.

[QUOTE=EcksDee;52052868]I once had a professor that said "ok, write me an essay, every adjective is -5 points"[/QUOTE] Yuck. Both of the English classes I took 3 years ago never marked down for that kind of stuff (mankind, to man, etc...) bur rather having shitty sentences and structure basically. In the writing focused classes I took for my major as well, it was the same thing - and those were Anthropology courses. And in any other class I've taken that has an essay component, no professor has ever marked down for using words like that. Some of the best history books I've read tend not to follow those sort of style guidelines too, for example I recently finished Tommy by Richard Holmes - he switched between first and third person a couple of times and stuff like that. Writing is far more malleable than most realize tbh, and you shouldn't be afraid to experiment and find what works for you.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;52052304]Here we go. Avoiding words like mankind is incredibly standard in University writing essays. I have a book all about that encourages you to use gender neutral words in order to appear as objective as possible. Instead of mankind, pick better words such as humankind. Of course a lot of people here are exaggerating and thinking that you can't quote people anymore of they use words like "mankind", that's not how writing works. As for the rest of the garbage such as using "he" and "she"? [url]http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/dont-man-up-students-may-lose-marks-for-using-he-t356wkdrq[/url] Again, incredibly standard but over-sensationalized. I encourage everyone to do their own research on the subject instead of relying on daily mail or a trash guardian article that doesn't even link to the source paper.[/QUOTE] I'm working on a doctoral level degree and I have, quite literally, never heard of using "humankind" instead of "mankind"...Or not using anything with -man in it, for that matter. Also, A+ for using a source that requires people to sign up to view the entire article.

I'm so glad that the uni I went to didn't give a damn about this frivolous bullshit

Working on my Masters, and have only encountered this once out of dozens of professors. And that professor who cared was off in her profession/subject material to begin with. Mankind is better off without such moral busybodies and should focus on actual essay writing.