<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19120">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><SPAN></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=gmail_quote>
<DIV><SPAN><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Risker wrote:</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I confess that this post made me smile. Back in the day when my feminist
streak was first being nurtured, the differentiation of men and women doing
the same job by the use of suffixes was a major thorn in the side of most
feminists. Over time, there was often a complete change in terminology,
e.g. steward/stewardess to flight attendant, or "manholes" becoming
maintenance accesses since not everyone working in them was a man. Some
occupations dropped the 'feminine" suffix entirely, usually as that was the
preference of the women who worked within that field. ("Comedian" and "actor"
are particularly noteworthy examples.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It seems we may be coming full circle, in that an increasing number of
feminist women are seeking to return to the sex-differentiated terms.
</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>My observation:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial> As I noted a long time ago, at
the beginning of this list, yoga (a field overwhelmingly, but hardly of
necessity, female) is a notable exception, so many female practitioners
embrace "yogini", the female form of "yogi."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Daniel
Case</FONT> </DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>