sexist language (fwd)

[Natalie Yarwood <n9144403@henson.cc.wwu.edu>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 12:41:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: Natalie Yarwood <n9144403@henson.cc.wwu.edu>
To: CEDA-L <listserv@cornell.edu>
Subject: sexist language

I've only been watching the sexist language thread for a while, so maybe
this point has been raised already, but it seems to me that there is an
easy way to evaluate sexist language in cards.  When you read a card with
sexist language in it, read it as the author intended.  Then offer a
disclaimer, for example, "My partner and I would argue that this is
applicable to womyn as well".  Then the debate can center around if the
evidence is credible or not.  If not, the impact of the critique should be
to disregard the evidence i.e. drop it from the round.  Either way, the
debators should not be punished, as their position is not a sexist one. 
On the other hand, if the debators read sexist evidence without clarifying
their position on it, I can see the impact of the critique as being a
voting issue.
Natalie Yarwood
Western Washington University

---

• Prev by Date: Nationals
• Next by Date: Re: taking on the "bear"
• Prev by thread: Nationals
• Next by thread: Re: taking on the "bear"
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page