Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

ancianita

(41,515 posts)

6. I see. Okay. I meant "men" as in the general pronoun sense of "mankind," not in the literal gender sense.

Reply to speak easy (Reply #5)

Thu Aug 21, 2025, 11:29 PM

Aug 21

Maybe we come from different historical contexts?

Today it might be considered sexist, but the men has been a 'general pronoun' referring to people in general. Maybe we don't say peoplekind and humankind is preferred. I've read "rule of men" a lot on DU to refer to authoritarian govts as opposed to "rule of law" democratic govts.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

California Gov. Newsom signs legislation calling special election on redrawn congressional map [View all] BumRushDaShow Aug 21 OP

I don't think the party of the flaming pants is entitled to comment about tactics. jls4561 Aug 21 #1

California Stands Firm Against Partisan Power Plays Atreus Aug 21 #2

Exactly. The difference: CA uses "rule of law" gerrymandering. TX uses "rule of men" gerrymandering. ancianita Aug 21 #3

"TX uses "rule of men" speak easy Aug 21 #5

I see. Okay. I meant "men" as in the general pronoun sense of "mankind," not in the literal gender sense. ancianita Aug 21 #6

Yes ! republianmushroom Aug 21 #4

I would crawl over broken glass to vote for that. I'll make sure all my friends here vote too! SunSeeker Aug 21 #7