Re: Which language pays most -- C++ vs. Java?

["James Giles" <jamesgiles@worldnet.att.net>]

Michael Rubenstein wrote in message
<34e43647.50558038@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
...
>Obviously you are very bothered by this.  So bothered that you didn't
>notice that the sentence that started this may be considered to fall
>into that category.  It was not talking about a specific individual.

Evidently you didn't read my articles.  I didn't address the original
example at all.  And no, the original example doesn't bother me.
In fact, I use that kind of phrase all the time ("if everyone would
raise their glasses in a toast").

What does bother me is people using the plural when it actually
makes their statement *false*.  Such as the sample I wrote about
the pilot's responsibilities.  Another thing that bothers me is usage
which scrambles the meaning so badly that it can't be followed
clearly: "the man lost their wife to cancer."  Whose wife?  Was
the man (who is the subsect of the sentence) one of those married
to her?  Is this a story about cancer or bigamy?  (This example was
heard on CNN.)

Finally, what bothers me is to be told that my occasional use
of the traditional generic is sexist.  It isn't.  Indeed, it is the reader
who makes such an accusation that is being impolite.  The reader
who interprets the use of the traditional generic as sexist is the
one making the decision to exclude women from the domain of
those the writing is about.  This is true regardless of the intent of
the writer.

--
J. Giles