Editorial Sesame Park : ‘ s : ; AWA HEC ie E ELH WD 10 Dele he recent protest by First Nations students in the concourse once again emphasizes the Ae he a ce uu wx biggest problem that this institution faces—communication. ooo aN ewe ec eA ie 8 Consider the faculty association’s recent thirty page report that complained they are are een 6. eS Nd NR being left out of the budgetary processes. What they are asking for is better communi- cation between faculty and administration. ee ee re ae et a Or the recent audit of Information Technology at Douglas, that listed, among other things, poor See ie ee communication—between Systems and staff, between Systems and Computing and the Centre for oe eo et eS Educational Technologies, and even between members of the College Operations Group—as areas of J . : : ; : : : : 3 : concern that needed work. It is a problem that divides individuals, groups and institutions through the college. Everybody wants COM ee Ee Re eee © to know what's happening, but nobody is telling. Or they’re not telling everything. Or they're not telling “ — V E S Y T NEWT DTC : the truth. S VY SNa -MeBSe RNS Ne BPE og Communication is at the foundation of any social grouping, and this school is no exception. And the rh eee ee a Fm te difference between a working, functioning, growing community and a stagnant, dysfunctional, dying Me VAI OO ORS igen Gio Ee Ege 7 community is often measured in quality of communication. GaN SPM. So SaeGo et Wo STV Note the key term there is quality, not quantity. Honesty and openness are important—one might say foundational—to successful communication. Philosopher Martin Buber calls it “I-thou” communication; the laying aside of masks and perceptions, and just being open and honest. ie ae — It’s tough in an institution of this size, though, to be open and honest with everybody. Or even with — Jumping were ee the right people. Because we—all of us, students, faculty and administration—get caught up ina ssseas say sae Om sa whirlwind of work that seems more important than taking the time to engage in soulful conversations ec “ ae 6 vee with anybody. Honesty comes at a great spiritual price; you must give away a part of yourself to some- antl aie Sct one, and it is easier, less dangerous, to keep you all to yourself. Easier, but the path of least resistance Cashing eee einai aie often leads places you don’t want to go. Dodie Lnuie Wheelchair Ironic that in this age of communication, of the Internet, of telecommunications, where we have the Evcrcise Kinbex Nine ability to communicate with nearly anyone and everyone, that our biggest problem is that we can’t Gonceries Playground communicate well. Quality has been passed over for quantity, and mass market media becomes the Hobbies Ray norm. Sugar coat reality. Honesty and openness replaced by the ten second sound bite. Hockey Recycling Perhaps we at Douglas College have forgotten how to communicate. Or perhaps we're letting our differences—Native vs. white, faculty vs. administration, student vs. teacher—get in the way of the underlying thread of humanity that links us at a more basic level than that at which any of these surface distinctions divide. Maybe when we recognize the commonality between I and thou and celebrate the differences, then will we have learned something from our time at Douglas, student and educator alike. Letter To the editor: 1 am writing in defense of the letter I wrote that appeared in the most recent issue of the Other Press. I would like to state that the title given to Mi the — Gihier | Press Voume @1 > lamas 10 January BT at 1907 : TY dont think is 1020-700 Royal Avenue my letter was not only inappropriate but also not New Westminster, sod my own words. I did not call Jezebel a “slut,” but V3L 5B2 simply expressed my distaste of the issue at hand. I personally feel that had I used the words of Phone 525-3542 the OP (which appeared in quotes for no apparent Fax 527-5095. reason) I would have wasted the money I’ve spent The Other Press is Douglas College's on the cost of tuition and books for a year at autonomous student newspaper. We college, not to mention the hours devoted to ‘ have been publishing since 1976. The Other Press is runas a non-heirarchical collective, The OP pubiahen every week daring this semester — we felt like we needed .. the change —and monthly[asa magazine] during the summer : We receive our funding from a student levy collected every semesterat = registration, and from local and national advertising revenue. The Other Press is a newber of the Canadian University Press, a cooperative of student news papers from across Canada. We claim to adhere to CUP’s Statement of Common Principles and — Code of Ethics. The Other Press reserves the right to choose what to publish, and what not to publish, We don’t publish anything racist, sexist or homophobic. If — you have any quibbles with what we choose, maybe you should get your lazy butt down here and help. Acting Coordinating Staff Advertising ~ vacant a Athletics ~ ~ Jonathan Chapman oS Arts & Entertainment ~ Kim Jorgensen Classifieds ~ Barbara See ee Creative ~ Gweny Wong Coquitlam ~ Marcel Martin. CUP Liaison ~ John: Morash Distribution ~ Michael Features ~ Arthur Hanks Graphics ~ vacant < News ~ Jim Chliboyko- . : Opinion and Editorial ~ - Corene | Mekay corme@ven.beca Photography ~ Eric Milner Production ~ jessica Fish = Systems Operator ~ Michael Pierre Contributors: : < Robert Moffat, Kevin Gallows Janse = Kurylo, David Sussman, Cheryl Chui, o er Joyce ee Employees Accounting ~ Marion Drakos _ Production Resource ~ vacant Editorial Resource ~ Trent Ernst study. I merely felt the need to write an intelligent response to the article that would also show our generation that there are still some decent people out there. Monica Longhurst OPinion ‘ Political Corrections damage English by David Sussman s George Orwell illus trated in his classic novel 1984, language not only dictates how we communicate with others, but also what we communicate, and ultimately even what we think. Ideas and concepts are largely bound up in words, so thought is constrained by the language at the thinker’s disposal. This is a key concept behind present day ‘political correctness,’ and its emphasis on language and terminology. The control of language can serve useful purposes and benefit society. For example, the words ‘imbecile,’ ‘moron,’ and ‘idiot’ were originally clinical psychiatric terms. With common usage, they developed negative connotations. Eventually a new word, ‘mentally retarded’ was developed. As usage became corrupt, the term was changed to ‘developmentally challenged.’ New terms were periodically introduced ina commendable effort to preserve the dignity of those to whom they referred. Furthermore, these specific changes were appropriate choices because they did not cause the degradation of language: they stuck to the rules. Unfortunately, with modern political correctness we are seeing lingual default to the masculine ‘-or’ suffix in all cases. This pattern of inappropriate language change is becoming common, and is often based ona false understanding of the lan- guage in the changes that first place. For are much more example: when difficult to The argument that used as a suffix justify than the Enctichi or prefix, the above exam- ng ish is male-based letters ‘m-a-n’ ple. These are is tenuous at best are not mascu- the ones that line, they are serve no gender-neutral. purpose other Despite this fact, than to damage the integrity of the special interest groups are object- language. For example, the use of the word ‘actress’ is gradually being considered inappropriate: “actor” is to be used for performers of either sex. This makes no sense. The use of the word ‘actress’ has not developed any negative associations, therefore no need exists to change it in the first place. Furthermore, if a gender-neutral word is deemed necessary, the general use of the masculine form is a poor solution. Surely it would make better sense to use the word ‘acter’ (one who acts), than to ing to all non-gender words containing them, from ‘chairman’ to ‘woman’ to ‘mankind.’ These changes are not being encouraged in an effort to avoid negative connotations, and are not even originating in the direct interest of the individuals being referred to. Use of new terms is being de- manded as a matter of principle, the principle being that English is male-based, and must be changed in the interest of fairness to both sexes. The argument that English is male-based is tenuous at best, but even if one accepts this error as fact, precisely how changing the spelling of ‘woman’ and ‘women’ to ‘womyn’ and ‘wimmin’ will further equal rights is a mystery. Besides, even if the appearance of the “m” word is considered damaging and harmful in and of itself, a far more complete evasion would be to use the words ‘lady’ and ‘ladies’ rather than attempt to create new suffixes and spelling structures. Cultural change can be caused by language change, but only when the lingual changes are logical and purposeful. Unfortunately many of the revisions of the English lan- guage being introduced by the new political correctness do not meet these criteria. Many of these contemporary language and terminology changes are being demanded for no more precise a reason than an abstract principle. Perhaps worse, they are often based ona lack of understanding (or a disregard for maintaining) our language's structure. Such changes can only lead to a general loss of integrity for the language and increased confusion as to what is acceptable and why. 2 January 211997 The Other Press