<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gender and Sex</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/gender-and-sex/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/gender-and-sex</link>
	<description>Language in a word</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 02:46:09 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: John Cowan</title>
		<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/gender-and-sex/comment-page-1#comment-9100</link>
		<dc:creator>John Cowan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 18:45:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linguism.co.uk/?p=341#comment-9100</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re right and Pat&#039;s wrong, no doubt about that.  Nevertheless, even linguists are more likely to say &lt;i&gt;noun class&lt;/i&gt; than &lt;i&gt;gender&lt;/i&gt; where there is no connection to sex at all, as in the case of Bantu languages.

Also, it&#039;s not the case that biological = chromosomal.  There are XY people who have androgen insensitivity syndrome, which makes them present as female, think of themselves as female, be seen by others as female, and live mostly ordinary female lives, except for being infertile (no uterus develops).  This is eminently distinguishable from any sort of men living female lives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right and Pat&#8217;s wrong, no doubt about that.  Nevertheless, even linguists are more likely to say <i>noun class</i> than <i>gender</i> where there is no connection to sex at all, as in the case of Bantu languages.</p>
<p>Also, it&#8217;s not the case that biological = chromosomal.  There are XY people who have androgen insensitivity syndrome, which makes them present as female, think of themselves as female, be seen by others as female, and live mostly ordinary female lives, except for being infertile (no uterus develops).  This is eminently distinguishable from any sort of men living female lives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: iakon</title>
		<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/gender-and-sex/comment-page-1#comment-9099</link>
		<dc:creator>iakon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 17:28:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linguism.co.uk/?p=341#comment-9099</guid>
		<description>Another &#039;main driving force&#039; is the rise and spread of American feminism throughout the Seventies.  Prior to this the word &#039;gender&#039; was not widely used, at least in my part of the world, B. C.
And at a guess, those early feminists used the word &#039;gender&#039; to avoid the word &#039;sex&#039; with its carnal implications, now dominant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another &#8216;main driving force&#8217; is the rise and spread of American feminism throughout the Seventies.  Prior to this the word &#8216;gender&#8217; was not widely used, at least in my part of the world, B. C.<br />
And at a guess, those early feminists used the word &#8216;gender&#8217; to avoid the word &#8217;sex&#8217; with its carnal implications, now dominant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Faldone</title>
		<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/gender-and-sex/comment-page-1#comment-9084</link>
		<dc:creator>Faldone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2009 19:17:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linguism.co.uk/?p=341#comment-9084</guid>
		<description>I think one main driving force behind the change, besides the use of &#039;sex&#039; to mean the reproductive act, is that grammatical gender has become essentially lost in English.  The only remnants of the system are in the personal pronouns and a few moribund suffixes.  Except for a few poetic uses these are universally a sign of the sex of the referent and not their grammatical gender.  Therefore, there is no reason to use the word &#039;gender&#039; to refer to a grammatical quality and every reason to use it in the place of the tinged word &#039;sex.&#039;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think one main driving force behind the change, besides the use of &#8217;sex&#8217; to mean the reproductive act, is that grammatical gender has become essentially lost in English.  The only remnants of the system are in the personal pronouns and a few moribund suffixes.  Except for a few poetic uses these are universally a sign of the sex of the referent and not their grammatical gender.  Therefore, there is no reason to use the word &#8216;gender&#8217; to refer to a grammatical quality and every reason to use it in the place of the tinged word &#8217;sex.&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
