Gender not included 'Freshman' discriminates against women Notice anything different about the Daily today? Our new editors have brought in several style changes, including attributing students in their first year at the University as "freshman" instead of "first-year students" in all sections except for the editorial page. It's a small change - one most might not even notice, let alone care about. But we are, as a paper, making a statement to the University administration, who use the word "freshman" in their operations. The Daily has used the term "first-year student" instead on "freshman" for 13 years. On April 13, 1987, the Daily's editors stated the following in a front-page infog: "Beginning today, the Daily will use gender-inclusive language. This means, for example, changing freshman to first-year student, chairman to chair, and congressman to member of Congress. By changing our language we can change ideas about stereotypical gender roles. The change may shock people or sounds wrong, but all change seems odd at first." Changing back to "freshman" from "first-year student" more than a decade later may seem odd as well. But the Daily is not, by any means, taking a step backwards. "Freshman" is the title given to new students by the University. The Daily must accurately name people in articles by their official titles, from a quoted SNRE sophomore to University President Lee Bollinger. The goal of the news, arts and sports sections is to report with accuracy, whether the Daily agrees with the name given to new students or not. The current editors believe using the word "freshman" is more accurate than "first-year student." But the Daily's editorial page is at liberty make judgement calls: "First-year student" should be used instead on "freshman" everywhere - in the Daily, by the University and by other institutions. The editorial page precedent is rooted in equality for all. This has always extended to women's rights, be it abortion or discrimination in the classroom. The 1987 Daily editors may have been a bit ahead of their time, but they were right on: "First-year student" is preferable to "freshman." The word "freshman" is inherently exclusive. "Freshman" was appropriate 150 years ago when colleges and universities were first founded in the United States - when women were simply not allowed to attend college. The University of Notre Dame and Amherst College are only two of several prestigious institutions that did not admit women until the 1970's. Not everyone is offended by words like "freshmen," yet they would find it wrong to refer to Julie Peterson as a University spokesman when she is clearly female. Why can the suffix "man" easily blanket both sexes, but the reverse is considered ridiculous: "Policewoman" referring to both male and female members of the police force? Impossible. "Congressman" referring to both male and female members of Congress? No problem. But there is a problem - parts of the English language are exclusive. Language can, and should, evolve. After all, it was once acceptable and common to refer to African-Americans as 'colored.' The University needs to evolve. Why does a University that champions political correctness and leveling the playing field by defending its affirmative action policy in court still refer to first-year students as freshman? Has the ever-politically correct administration simply overlooked this issue? Bollinger should not ignore this inconsistency and act of gender exclusion - even if only by language - any longer. The University should drop the word "freshman" and use "first-year student" instead. Originally on page 4A in the 1-31-2000 issue of the Daily.