Hand, Michael (2007) In defence of the opposite sex: a reply to Goldman and Collier. Sex Education, 7 (1). pp. 101-104. ISSN 1468-1811 (print); 1472-0825 (electronic)
|
PDF (In defence of the opposite sex: a reply to Goldman and Collier)
Hand2007InDefence101.pdf Download (87Kb) | Preview |
Official URL: http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/14681810601134...
Abstract
Juliette Goldman and Christine Collier have recently proposed that the editor of Sex Education should adopt a policy of replacing the phrase ‘opposite sex’ with ‘other sex’ in all published articles, on the grounds that the word ‘opposite’ has connotations of hostility or adversity. In this brief reply I argue that their reasoning does not stand up to scrutiny and that their proposal ought therefore to be rejected.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | This is an electronic version of an article published in Hand, Michael (2007) In defence of the opposite sex: a reply to Goldman and Collier. Sex Education, 7 (1). pp. 101-104. Sex Education is available online at:http://www.informaworld.com/10.1080/14681810601134777 Article is a response to Goldman, J.D.G. & Collier, C.A. (2006) ‘Letter to the editor’, Sex Education 6.1, pp.101-02 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Philosophy of education |
| Subjects: | Departments > Education Foundations and Policy Studies |
| Depositing User: | IOE Repository Editor (1) |
| Date Deposited: | 26 Feb 2010 13:14 |
| Last Modified: | 26 Jun 2012 22:25 |
| URI: | http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/1073 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
