Not only does the author give examples that avoid sexist language, it differentiates between those which are stylistically desirable and those which are stylistically awkward. The site also explains the difference between gender neutral and non-sexist language, something that could be very helpful for students trying to understand sexist language. The author asks (but does not answer) the question of whether or not it is the job of the writing teacher to effect social change by advocating a certain way of writing. This could certainly be a thought-provoking query to pose to your class or collegeaues. Finally, the site provides arguments for and against gender-neutral language in new translations of the Bible as well as links to sites that more thoroughly explore the topic, if you’re interested. Guaranteed to spark powerful opinions and solid class discussion!

— (Tiffany Grace Rayburn reviews my “Gender-neutral Language” handout.) Annotated Bibliography on Gender & Language  (Mike’s Homepage | USM)

I’m happily procrastinating on a paper that’s due later today. The above passage is from a review (Word | HTML) of an old version of my “Gender-neutral Language” handout. I really wish this had been posted in HTML, rather than as a Word document.

Coming across a favorable review of your work is good for the ol’ self-esteem. The same goes for some hearty disagreement or even well-researched, thoughtful indignation at an issue you raise. On the other hand… this still bugs me. I posted a request for suggstions four days after somebody posted a brief mixed critique of my blog (great content, poor layout). I’ve completely re-designed it since then. But the criticism sits there, frozen… mocking me every time I surf for new references to my site.