2018 AA Club - Week 5

[scout]

Background: Gender-neutral pronouns are on the rise, with the Western world's move to 'gender equality', and have been enforced by the University of Tennessee in America (UT Knoxville).

Keep focus on education

I came to Nashville in 1970 to become an editor.

In my editorial role, I dealt with the secular press, the religious press, interdenominationally with other editors, and the so-called feminist movement.

I learned where all the land mines lay in the pronoun war on using gender-neutral pronouns.

My orientation and job led me to be more sensitive on how to use pronouns that weren’t chauvinistic and could be inclusive in plurals, etc.

But the role also introduced me to the ridiculous contriving to use genderless pronouns.

Today, even a wise feminist may be put off with the contrived efforts to avoid masculine pronouns or even choosing to use a feminine pronoun. Think from 1970 to 2015: UT Knoxville’s controversy is almost half a century behind the times and fighting a needless, heedless war today.

Personhood itself is far more important than gender. And whether a generic “man” or a specific “he” or “she” gets used, the personhood isn’t injured.

The injury comes in wasting time on pedantic wars and attempts to define political correctness.

UT Knoxville would do better to try to help the students get an education that has content, skill and ability to communicate than nits and gnats of pronouns.

-Johnnie Godwin

[MissSmiley]

Happy Monday guys!
Thanks so much for looking over my writing!

In a crotchety tone, Johnnie Godwin fervently condemns UT Knoxville’s enforcement of gender neutral pronouns to be a mere smokescreen in obscuring a person’s identity regardless of their gender.

Commencing with listing his experiences in his anecdote as an editor, Godwin characterises the institutions to be contributing to an immense threat – a “land mine” as they brawl for the use of gender neutral pronouns. Presenting a terrifying image of a land mine exploding when such institutions compete against each other in the “war” to using gender-neutral pronouns, Godwin seeks to warn UT Knoxville writers’ of their potentially diminishing sense of security and its students’ disapproval of a University that perplexes its students by using “chauvinistic” and “inclusive” pronouns that serve no purpose in maintaining personhood. This use of the fear of vulnerability seeks to persuade UK Knoxville to abolish the epicene third-person pronoun that can refer to plural antecedents but not to individuality.

Calling the feminist movement to be “so-called,” is an attempt to highlight the flaws of its notion, in that it is deviating from its expected role of advocating for women’s rights and hence promoting the ‘she’ pronoun which would promote feminine individuality better. Similarly, Godwin censures feminist tendency in being “put off” with the use of a feminine pronoun, despite being a “wise feminist” who would promote a balance between the masculine and feminine pronoun. This appeal to wisdom and feminist values is used antithetically by Godwin to highlight feminist groups’ poor decision in fighting in a “needless, heedless” war – the childlike rhyme emphasising the movement’s immaturity in “wasting” time to define political correctness instead of individual identity. Through the appeal, Godwin solicits feminist activists to recommence its use of the “she” pronoun so as to differ between the male and female gender that determines an individual’s identity.

Finishing his disapproval of gender neutral pronouns, Godwin presents them as “nits and gnats” in his sardonic tone to present UT Knoxville as foolish in destroying personhood and instead worrying about political correctness. Through this, Godwin seeks to advocate for the necessity of UT Knoxville’s education to cater for “content, skill and ability to communicate” in society which would be a much more balanced approach in acknowledging various identities around us.

[clarke54321]

Happy Monday guys!
Thanks so much for looking over my writing!

In a crotchety wow! What an interesting word for tone  tone, Johnnie Godwin fervently condemns UT Knoxville’s enforcement of gender neutral pronouns to be a mere smokescreen in obscuring a person’s identity regardless of their gender this is a bit wordy. Remember clarity > excessive sophistication. Additionally, consider Godwin's views on education, and what this should comprise of. This is at the crux of his contention. .

Commencing with listing his experiences in his anecdote as an editor <---this could do with some tighter expression.Try- By anecdotally referring to his experience as an editor, Godwin......, Godwin characterises this isn't the right verb. Perhaps Godwin avers/declares/argues that the institutions are contributing to.... the institutions to be contributing to an immense threat – a “land mine” as they brawl for the use of gender neutral pronouns. Presenting a terrifying image of a land mine exploding when such institutions compete against each otherthis is entirely up to interpretation, but I didn't get the sense that institutions are in conflict over gender neutral pronouns. I saw it as a "war," in a more social context. in the “war” to using gender-neutral pronouns, Godwin seeks to warn UT Knoxville writers’ of their potentially diminishing sense of security and its students’ disapproval of a University that perplexeshmm..not sure how you got to this? its students by using “chauvinistic” and “inclusive” pronouns that serve no purpose in maintaining personhood <--this seems like a summary of Godwin's argument- not entirely analysis. . This use of the fear of vulnerabilityclunky. Maybe For having hence appealed to readers' sense of vulnerability, ..... seeks to persuade UK Knoxville to abolish the epicene third-person pronoun that can refer to plural antecedents but not to individualitytry not to overdo the complexity of your argument. Keep language to a minimum for clarity purposes. .

Calling the feminist movement to be “so-called,” is an attempt to highlight the flaws of its notion, in that it is deviating from its expected role of advocating for women’s rights and hence promoting the ‘she’ pronoun which would promote feminine individuality better <--nice insight here. But I'd recommend that you cut down on length.. Similarly, Godwin censures feminist tendency in being “put off” with the use of a feminine pronoun, despite being a “wise feminist” who would promote a balance between the masculine and feminine pronoun. This appeal to wisdom and feminist values is used antitheticallyI understand your direction, but I think you've rushed to get here (resulting in some confusion). Spend your time fleshing out words/phrases. Analyse everything you quote! by Godwin to highlight feminist groups’ poor decision in fighting in a “needless, heedless” war – the childlike rhyme emphasising the movement’s immaturitylovely analysis in “wasting” time to define political correctness instead of individual identity. Through the appeal, Godwin solicits feminist activists to recommence its use of the “she” pronoun so as to differ between the male and female gender that determines an individual’s identity <--nice closing, but cut down on sentence length..

Finishing his disapproval of gender neutral pronouns, Godwin presents them as “nits and gnats” in his sardonic tone to present UT Knoxville as foolishyes, this the "why," but where is the analysis of the "how" (nits and gnats). Connotations? Imagery? How does this phrase connect to the idea of foolishness? in destroying personhood and instead worrying about political correctness. Through this, Godwin seeks to advocate for the necessity of UT Knoxville’s education to cater for “content, skill and ability to communicate” in society which would be a much more balanced approach in acknowledging various identities around us I'm not sure whether this final paragraph is a conclusion. If not, I'd try and rework this last line. It aligns more closely with an annotated summary..

Again, fantastic job on your analysis and dedication, MissSmiley. You'll benefit immensely come the end of this year! You're still segregating arguments effectively, zooming out to reader effect, and picking up on tonal shifts/subtleties. However, something that's becoming more obvious to me, is your propensity to overdo complex language. Clarity should be your highest priority in English. It's not worth sacrificing your perspicacity for the sake of extreme sophistication. If you can work on this, your analysis is more likely to come to the fore, as will your own original voice. Keep it up

[MissSmiley]

Again, fantastic job on your analysis and dedication, MissSmiley. You'll benefit immensely come the end of this year! You're still segregating arguments effectively, zooming out to reader effect, and picking up on tonal shifts/subtleties. However, something that's becoming more obvious to me, is your propensity to overdo complex language. Clarity should be your highest priority in English. It's not worth sacrificing your perspicacity for the sake of extreme sophistication. If you can work on this, your analysis is more likely to come to the fore, as will your own original voice. Keep it up

Thank you so much Clarke!!
I'll work on making it simpler next time!