🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3067@silver.bacs.indiana.edu> chiaravi@silver.UUCP (Lucius Chiaraviglio) writes:
<In article <Added.8XrfC6y00Ui3MefU83@andrew.cmu.edu> HOWGREJ@YALEVM.BITNET
<(Greg Howard) writes:
<|   Just out of curiousity, and to keep from offending anyone, is there a
<|non-sexist term for a "manned" mission?  Here they've taken to calling
<|first-year students "freshpersons", but a "personned" mission just doesn't
<|sound right.  Any thoughts?
<
<	"Crewed" and "staffed" are perfectly acceptable, and the latter of
<these even sounds good.

"Crewed" isn't usable due to an unfortunate homonym. It's hard to get 
politicians and the public interested when they hear the newscaster say
something about a "crude" mission... 1/2 :-)

And Staffed already has a meaning that we *don't* want, as in  "they
staffed it" (ie got the staff to draw up all the @$^%$ paperwork)

-- 
Leonard Erickson		...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools.
Let's start with typewriters." -- Solomon Short