{"content":{"sharePage":{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"23803877","dateCreated":"1273155514","smartDate":"May 6, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"rook217","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/rook217","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23803877"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Hey Guys","description":"Hey guys I just wanted to say that this person is being absurd. For example I just technically called you all guys. However you and I both know that the majority of you are women. "hey guys" or "mankind" are just phrases that carry little meaning in today's society. When we say things such as hey guys we normally just process it in our minds as a simple hello or greeting. It is a term that is used and acknowledged for both genders. Thus to say that the term is discriminatory in terms of gender makes no sense what so ever.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23803875","dateCreated":"1273155513","smartDate":"May 6, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"rook217","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/rook217","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23803875"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Hey Guys","description":"Hey guys I just wanted to say that this person is being absurd. For example I just technically called you all guys. However you and I both know that the majority of you are women. "hey guys" or "mankind" are just phrases that carry little meaning in today's society. When we say things such as hey guys we normally just process it in our minds as a simple hello or greeting. It is a term that is used and acknowledged for both genders. Thus to say that the term is discriminatory in terms of gender makes no sense what so ever.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23721943","dateCreated":"1273019750","smartDate":"May 4, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"jennawong6","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jennawong6","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23721943"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Hey Guys","description":"Although I believe in gender equality, I found this article to be quite frustrating. The author is over-thinking the matter and is taking a much too sensitive stance. I personally have never took offense to the expression, "Hey guys," or to signs that read, "Men at work." In my experience, "Hey LADIES" seems more demeaning because this expression is usually said with a flirty undertone intended as kind of pick-up line. When males use this expression, they usually are not doing it out of respect for females, but to appear gentlemanly as a means of attraction. In addition, addressing people by their genders (i.e. "ladies and gentlemen") does not level the playing field, but rather separates people by their gender. The most frustrating part of the article is the aggression towards words like "mankind," which "ostracize" women. This is simply the English language. I am sure that the originators of the English language had no intention of ostracizing women when they created this word, but rather based in on Latin roots. Toward the end of the article, the author asks, "Are we becoming overly concerned to the point of absurdity?" My answer is yes, this article is pushing the limit of absurdity.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23721449","dateCreated":"1273019154","smartDate":"May 4, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"mariahariola","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/mariahariola","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23721449"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"just words","description":"like the other current events, this was another interesting one. this current event was mainly about words that seem to be directed to males. for example: mankind, human, police man, mail man, etc. some of these words, because some caused tension, were changed. for example mail man is now know has mail carrier. i feel that this article is really based on point of views.
\npersonally i do not take offense to these words. i feel that they are just words and cant be changed. if we change these words, then we might as well change our whole language. the lady that wrote this article obviously had strong feelings about this.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23717793","dateCreated":"1273014447","smartDate":"May 4, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"kenagata","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/kenagata","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23717793"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Hi guys!","description":"I find this article very intresting. I think it is somewhat degrading to females that most sayings like, "hey guys" mean either males or females but the word is "guys" not "hey girls." This personally doesn't offend me, I myself use the phrase "hey guys" a lot. I think it's the evolution of our language. Since women were inferior before language was based around males. For example in the Ammendments, "All men are created equal" refers to females and males but they use the word "men." I believe that in time our language will change in that sence because it has been in other areas already.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23297165","dateCreated":"1272270236","smartDate":"Apr 26, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"emasutani","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/emasutani","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23297165"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"The entire world must use PC","description":"..PC meaning politically correctness here. But seriously now, I understand the writer's point here. I too have wondered in the past about the men working signs and have distinctly wondered about where the women are. In all honesty, though, for me, this issue has never been a big deal. In an age where literally nobody dares to offend anyone else for fear of being crucified on grounds of political incorrectness, this article highlights a trend where, really, nobody can even hint at offending anyone else. Words are just that, words. Again, I understand the opinion that the terms 'men' and 'mankind' can be construed as sexist, however, the more concerning issue is mindset: if someone is hell-bent on believing him\/herself to be a victim, said person will inevitably become a victim. It is a difficult case, since there is merit to calling this case a case of sexism, however, there should be a limit to how correct people must be in their speech. The idea of forcing men to include women in all their conversations is, well, offensive. Doing so would rob a natural right of people to choose with whom they wish to socialize with and under what conditions. Inclusion, while nice, should not necessarily be necessary. People should focus less on seeing themselves as victims and focus more on their own success. At the same time though, people should fight blatant oppression for their fellow man. It is a delicate case, but this particular case is not one I feel inclined to fight for either way.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23290809","dateCreated":"1272248674","smartDate":"Apr 25, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"maliama","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/maliama","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23290809"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"manly words","description":" I understood the point Cynthia was trying to make, but I did not find it very important. The word \u201cman\u201d shows up in many words. It\u2019s the root for human. It has two meanings, male, and human. I realize that it is upsetting to some people, but saying woman kind still has the word man in it. I think there are many other women\u2019s equality issues worth fighting for and this is not one of them. It\u2019s a part of our language that can\u2019t be change. The English language would have to be re-invented to leave out man and male in words that mean everyone. I do think that mankind is exclusive, but is it really just an abbreviation for human kind? Because human kind is not offending to me. \u201cMen working\u201d is very exclusive. I would not get angry if I saw a sign like that, but it should be changed if some girls are included in those \u201cmen working\u201d. I do not think \u201cyou guys\u201d is horrible either. It\u2019s part of how language is used. It reminds me of Spanish and how there are masculine endings to refer to either men or everyone. The feminine endings are only used if it is only females being addressed. I don\u2019t think that the English language will ever be re-written, so phrases like \u201cyou guys\u201d will never be deleted from our vocabulary.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23251411","dateCreated":"1272085545","smartDate":"Apr 23, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"jamietaka","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jamietaka","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23251411"},"dateDigested":1532140172,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Maybe an overreaction?","description":"Although I do understand where Cynthia Good is coming from (as I myself used to wonder why we were "mankind"), but I think she is getting into a fuss over nothing. Within the past 30 years, society has become more aware of the male-specific titles like "mail man" and has changed it to "mail carrier" thanks to the help of Title IX. She cites three examples. Mankind, "men at work" and "hey guys." The first is derived from Sanskrit, as mentioned, and is therefore not gender specific. The second phrase has been changed to "men at work," and as she points out, there is already work underway by the government to make the signs gender neutral. This leaves the phrase "hey guys." Women and men in the work place do not use such colloquial language, thus I do not see it as extremely discriminatory. I think her main argument was that women were still a minority in the work place, and that it is difficult for them to adjust. This, I can agree with. It is difficult for male-dominated companies to interact with female employees and to accept their ideas, but change comes with time, and I do not think that our language is prohibiting such change.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23245477","dateCreated":"1272063958","smartDate":"Apr 23, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"Khaydan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/Khaydan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23245477"},"dateDigested":1532140173,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"What's the fuss?","description":"I don't understand why this person is getting so worked up about simple words. I think that phrases like "humankind" and "mankind", or "men working" and "workers ahead" are synonyms and its a personal issue on how you interpret it. It doesn't make me feel ostracized because I know that the term comes from historic languages and therefore its nothing to freak out about. I think phrases like "you guys" are meant for your friends and are slang and also nothing to get worked up about. Furthermore, I think the fact that girls can even be called "guys" means that we are on an equal playing field with men and therefore its more of an equal term than saying "girls". Overall, I think this article is rather annoying in the fact that its trying to seperate men and women when historically women have been striving for equality.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"23244253","dateCreated":"1272059834","smartDate":"Apr 23, 2010","userCreated":{"username":"katobin16","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/katobin16","imageUrl":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/iolaniwomenlit.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/23244253"},"dateDigested":1532140173,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Only a phrase","description":"I really think that the author was a bit over the top. Clearly, society should strive to create a world where both genders are equal, however, it seems extreme to eliminate all words that seem to show preference to men. Most of the words the author speaks of have been known to society for centuries. It would take too much effort to eliminate them from our society, and to create new words. Although the word man does imply gender, it also can be human, and be genderless (according to Merriam Webster). It appears to be a bit intense to eliminate all gender biased words from society. Just because we live in a gender conscious society does not mean we have to eliminate all words that seem to imply gender.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]}],"more":true},"comments":[]},"http":{"code":200,"status":"OK"},"redirectUrl":null,"javascript":null,"notices":{"warning":[],"error":[],"info":[],"success":[]}}