Psalm 8:5

May I just remind everyone how I hate “gender inclusive language”? Not from a misogynistic perspective mind you; I think women are wonderful. I firmly believe the tenet of my religion that holds a certain woman named Mary the mother of Jesus to be the most perfect human being to walk the earth.

No, my main objection is the ugliness and artificiality of “gender inclusive language.”

Case in point:

This Lent I’m slowly working my way through the Psalms. The two Bibles I’m using are the New American Bible (1970), still in my possession from my high school religion days, and the New Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition (1989), a Christmas gift from my parents.

Guess which version never heard of “gender inclusion”?

Now, the NRSV-CE is normally a good, faithful, problem-free translation. I never had any “problems” with it, until I stumbled across something a few nights ago that made me shake my head at the tin-eared ineptitude of man. “Man,” in this case, referring to translators of either gender.

Psalm 8:5, NAB

“What is man that you should be mindful of him,
or the son of man that you should care for him?”

Psalm 8:5, NRSV-CE

“What are humans that you are mindful of them,
mere mortals that you care for them?”

Blech.

What is God, a Vulcan?

We are sacrificing beauty at the altar of political correctness.


[Though I see in a bit of internet searching that the NAB has been infected with “rampant liberalism”, though “modernism” as it was understood in the late 19th century, may be more to blame: Too tired to read it now, but perhaps I’ll give it a go at lunch tomorrow. I offer it here with the caveat that I have not read it so I may or may not agree with it.]