Subject: sexism and language

re lydie e . meunier 's latest , i did not mean to say that i consider oppression of any kind to be of no importance , but merely that in studying linguistic usages it is of no importance ( or at least less importance , ok ? ) what the real situation re oppression and the like is than what people perceive it to be . if ( as some seem to believe ) there is no oppression of women by men , i meant to say , that would not be what we would want to know in order to explain sexist language , so long as people believe that men are better , stronger , or whatever , so long as people believe that men are and deserve to be dominant and / or more prominent in public life , etc . because even if these things were not true ( although i think by large they obviously are ) , so long as people believe they are ( and certainly all cultures i am familiar with do ) , then that would suffice to explain sexist language . in the same way , we as linguists need not discuss the existence of god in order to be able to say that certain linguistic usages seem to be derived from such a belief . so , yes , i do believe women have been and continue to be oppressed in various ways , i am astounded that there are people who would deny it , but i also would say that in order to explain sexist language , that is not what we need to discuss . alexis manaster ramer
