Comments on: Mankind, Humankind, and Gender

By: Cecily

Cecily — Thu, 06 May 2010 14:39:35 +0000

I don’t understand why some people think “humankind” solves the perceived problem. It still contains the string “man”, and its etymological routes are also from homo/man. And what about “woMAN”?

I don’t like man/men used on their own to refer to people of both genders, but in words that have long had a more inclusive meaning, such as “mankind” it doesn’t bother me. (I’m a woman, in case you’re unfamiliar with the name Cecily.)

One surprising thing is that although such old-established words as “headmaster” and “chairman” are rarely used nowadays, I’ve never seen anyone object to “webmaster”, yet that was coined after people started discussing gender-neutral language.

By: Baruch Atta

Baruch Atta — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 13:59:54 +0000

“I’m an English teacher….” says pissed off.

And I am glad that I am not in her class. For instance “…most of you as complete idiots…” Does she view all the boys in her class this way? Seems so. Heaven help the third grade boys. Save the Males!

“…does ‘mankind’ include your little 6 year old neighbor…”
Answer: yes.

“…the other abuses of womankind…” have nothing to do with the use of the word “mankind”.

By: pissed off!

pissed off! — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 07:17:39 +0000

I really appreciate the people who are so politely trying to suggest that ‘mankind’ somehow really does include everyone, but the fact is it doesn’t. It doesn’t matter what you think is acceptable. Humankind is and should be the only option. I really can’t believe this is a debate. Seriously, it’s really difficult not to think of most of you as complete idiots. And, guess what I’m a feminist and proud of it. Feminism: the radical notion that women are people! And, guess what again… I’m an English teacher. You grammarians make me wish I never stepped foot in that ridiculous English dept.- the arrogance is staggering. Reason it out and read your grammar books to tell you the answer, but what’s the truth, really, does ‘mankind’ include your little 6 year old neighbor, Sally, who’s just learning to read? NO! Maybe we should ask the brain surgeons what they think and debate this some more, or how about just using ‘humankind’ from now on! Or, maybe your personal preference should come before Sally’s and maybe the other abuses of womankind around the globe are really not our concern either.

By: Alan

Alan — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:39:03 +0000

Hi Ken,

“Evil lurks in the heart of man.” and “Evil lurks in the heart of humankind.”

I would write “Evil lurks the heart of humanity,” or how about “Evil lurks in the heart of all.” The reader knows that the ‘all’ is refering to us human beings, without having to spell it out thst fact.

I find both these sentence work for me.

“Evil lurks in the heart of humanity”
“Evil lurks in the heart of all”

they both vibrate with rhythm and cadence.

By: Nemo

Nemo — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:58:25 +0000

I loved this article and the discussion after it. I’m just completely and utterly ecstatic that there wasn’t any cursing. It renews my faith in…people when I find out people can discuss sensitive issues without degrading into violent speech.

And just because I wanted to say something about the article: It is my opinion that the writer defines the word, the word does not define the writer.

Go on, crochet my brilliance on a pillow somewhere.

I liked the tangents too, even the ones that went over my head.