I was purusing the Washington Times and came across an article that says some Democrats don't like President Bush's most recent political ad. Fine and good; one could hardly expect them to. What caught my eye however was that the AP reporter who filed the story used the title "Miss" when referring to Republican National Committee spokesman Christine Iverson.
"We have no doubt that Senator Daschle and others in his party who oppose the president's policy of pre-emptive self-defense believe that their national-security approach is in the best interests of the country," RNC spokesman Christine Iverson said. ...I don't see "Miss" or "Mrs." used very often these days, with "Ms." being the preferred marriage-neutral title, and I thought it was noteworthy.The ad will air through tomorrow in Iowa, and then might run again in New Hampshire during the next Democratic debate in December, said the RNC's Miss Iverson.
She said the party plans to run ads in conjunction with the Democratic debates, but the decision hasn't been made whether to run the current ad or new ones supporting the president.
Additionally, Miss Iverson was referred to as the "spokesman", despite the fact that she's a woman; this is the appropriate job title, although the more politically correct "spokeswoman" or "spokesperson" is now universally common.
A similar transformation can be seen with the ascension of "their" as a third-person singular gender-neutral pronoun. It is correct to instruct that "Each student must submit his own report.", but modern gender-neutral usage has made the incorrect "Each student must submit their own report." widely accepted. English has no proper third-person gender-neutral pronoun, but there are other ways of eliminating gender, if it's greatly desired. For instance, "All students must submit their own reports." is acceptable.
If we can embrace nonsensical spellings of words, we can adapt to "their" for "his or her." It may seem awkward now (and ungrammatical) but on the other hand, who pays any attention to the original meaning of "awful" or "condescending" unless reading old manuscripts?
I recall awhile back that 'actor' and 'actress' were coming under fire because 'actress' was an inferior title, showing gender bias. I believe it was determined that 'actor' was appropriate for both male and female.
In the case of 'spokesman,' (our old friend) Chicago Manual suggests using 'spokesperson.' Ugh.
I believe it is political correctness gone too far. We now have to hide our gender, religion, age, ethnicity, etc. in the name of equality. We are becoming a gray nation. Instead of celebrating the differences--being a colorful nation full of differences--we are becoming a nation of gray nothings.
Sorry...didn't mean to rant there...