Dear Gunnar,

How wonderfully 17th C politically correct you are.  How comfortable to choose what is nice and ignore all the reasons others are offended.  How soothingly normal to remain the norm and to be in the category of the those whose politics are truth and not politics.

How politic to be so political in so ancient a way.

As for das Ewigweibliche, for god's sake, read deBeauvoir (no need to read anything too new)  and notice some changes in that politically correct definition of all non-male humanity.  Nothing has been more politically correct in all of history as the political definition of women as not the "inclusive" and men as the norm of humanity.  

I am astonished that you care so much about all other groups who have been historically excluded, and now you champion militant masculinism and resort to such absurd ostensible reasons, or rather personal assertions.


Nice reply, my dear Marcia -- mind my joining you guys? Move over for me in
that pew please!

What brouhaha about nothing.

Wouldn't it be nice to be able to accept "Man" as a synonym for "Mankind"?
As the frogs say: "Quel mal y a-t-il  a?" "What's so bad about it?"

In German, the use of both genders has become a wholly superfluous and
bothersome journalistic habit;  e.g.: The term "Taxpayers", "Steuerzahler",
is habitually changed to "Steuerzahler und -zahlerinnen", now commonly
abbreviated to "SteuerzahlerInnen" (note the capitalization within the word,
a novelty within our language).

However, such bothersome and trite neologisms will never change the attitude
of any given MCP (Male Chauvinist Pig), all it does is hamper the reading of
the text. It will never facilitate communication, au contraire.

If a person is unable to acknowledge the equality of genders (let alone our
civilization's dire need of the prevalence of the female element),
distortion of languages's common use will not help him (or her or it).


"Das Ewigweibliche zieht und hinan" (The everlasting female elevates us)
J. W. Goethe