Huperoffspringkind
Published by Rick on Sunday, August 31, 2008.
Sir,
Those of us who aspire to a modern non-discriminatory English language can only applaud the efforts of Chichester council to replace the pejorative and offensive man in their official documentation.
However, merely substituting human for man is clearly unsatisfactory as it still contains the overtly sexist suffix -man. The word person is often used as an alternative. However, this contains the equally male-biased element -son.
The only satisfactory word for our species as a whole would therefore be huperoffspringkind.
Yours etc.
John Philips
Gloucestershire
Those of us who aspire to a modern non-discriminatory English language can only applaud the efforts of Chichester council to replace the pejorative and offensive man in their official documentation.
However, merely substituting human for man is clearly unsatisfactory as it still contains the overtly sexist suffix -man. The word person is often used as an alternative. However, this contains the equally male-biased element -son.
The only satisfactory word for our species as a whole would therefore be huperoffspringkind.
Yours etc.
John Philips
Gloucestershire
0 Responses to “Huperoffspringkind”
Post a Comment