Time's "The Man"

I thought this was an interesting item, particularly in light of my previous post on evolution and adultery. It just goes to show how confused "man" is!!!

TIME’s “the man:” News weekly risking miscommunication?
Wednesday, March 15th, 2006by Jeff Robinson

Apparently TIME magazine is not aware that the use of the universal masculine "man" to mean "human race" risks confusing postmodern readers.

On the cover of the March 13 edition of the news weekly, TIME appropriates the term in a headline "The Untold Saga of Early Man in America." The headline alludes to TIME’s cover story on human skeletal remains discovered in America estimated to be more than 9,000 years old.

The common argument of evangelical Bible translators who take a so-called "gender-neutral" approach to translating is that the use of the universal masculine—"man"—is so outdated that postmodern readers do not understand its meaning.

Thus, the argument goes, for the sake of accuracy and clarity, masculine gender language—though long understood as a general term for human beings—must be dropped and replaced by a clearer, less offensive "gender neutral" term. Bible translations such as Today’s New International Version (TNIV) take such an approach.

Wayne Grudem, board member for The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and author of a number of books and articles on Bible translation, points out that TIME’s use of "man" still accords with standard contemporary style guides including the Associated Press Stylebook, Strunk and White’s Elements of Style, and most dictionaries.

"Too bad that way of using the word ‘man’ went out of the English language about 10 years ago, according to TNIV translators," Grudem said. "I guess that means nobody will understand what TIME means by its headline."