Newsgroups: sci.lang
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 1996 21:21:33 -0800
From:  <polyglot@global.california.com>
To: Hugh Hoskins <hthoskins@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: The word "Squaw"
In-Reply-To: <327903FC.FB4@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.961105211946.6539A-100000@global.california.com>
References: <327903FC.FB4@earthlink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
NNTP-Posting-Host: global.california.com
Lines: 25
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!nntp.uio.no!news.cais.net!in1.nntp.cais.net!news.sfo.com!news.zeitgeist.net!seashell.california.com!global.california.com!polyglot

Have you ever heard of the dementia named Political Correctness?
That's it!
Brian Chambers.


On Thu, 31 Oct 1996, Hugh Hoskins wrote:

> Have heard recent discussions that a group somewhere is trying is 
> organize against the use of the word "squaw" in reference to 
> AmericanIndian women because they feel that it is a derivitive of some 
> languages' word for a private part of the female body.
> My only exposure to the word is from movies and comic books as a kid 
> and it seemed perfectly harmless.
> Has anyone else heard of this recent flap?
> Is there any basis in fact for their argument?
> 
> As an ancillary observation: how can a culture which defends the rights 
> of porn publishers bother themselves with such possibilities? Have we 
> just too much spare time? Or are some of us so insecure in our own lives 
> that we have to strech out to try to leave a mark?
> 
> Will we next erase the word "hysterical"?
> 
> 

