
What should you do if you come across an unconscious person? - bookofjoe
https://www.bookofjoe.com/2020/08/behindthemedspeak-what-should-you-do-if-you-come-across-an-unconscious-person-that-was-the-question-posed-in-melinda-bec.html
======
feralimal
A quote in the article, from the Wall Street Journal: "A: Emergency physicians
say the first step is to verify that the person really is unconscious. Shout,
shake her, or dig your knuckles into her collarbone. That may revive her."

Lol. Who said it was a 'her'? That jumped out at me.

Just checking at the original article though:
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120277331164160573](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120277331164160573)
.. and you can see that in the WSJ, it was 'him'!

So this bookofjoe character, _says_ they are quoting the WSJ but actually
changes the quote, making a low level politically correct adjustment.

And I'm the chap (or idiot) who spends my time checking sources, and
uncovering this scandal! Lol.

~~~
bookofjoe
I confess: I am "this bookofjoe character" and I altered the quote from "him"
to "her" NOT to be low level politically correct but rather because it's
ALWAYS him and NEVER her — yet 50% of the time (I have no reference for this
statistic but I'm gonna be bold and use it anyway) it is a her.

If someone doesn't start evening things out, we'll never get there.

So flay me if you like, I deserve it, but I also think I did the right thing.

Though I could have added misquotation insult to injury by changing the Q.
part to "What should you do if you come across an unconscious person" and
omitting "as in the case of actor Heath Ledger?"

That might have averted your gimlet eye since "her" would have no male
antecedent.

I LOVE that you checked this: I probably would have done exactly the same
thing.

It's impossible, IMHO, to be too meticulous about accuracy.

Plus, it's fun when you expose someone like this bookofjoe character for what
he (note use of pronoun: I could have instead employed "they") is.

~~~
feralimal
I'm very glad you took this in the way I intended it! And that you took the
time to respond :)

I agree - when I read the original source, you do easily read 'him'; it
doesn't jar.

But, like you, I always wonder why they do that. I wouldn't. You can easily
use 'they', or say something like, presuming this is a man/woman you would
check him/her... etc.

But thanks for replying and taking the critique on the chin!

~~~
bookofjoe
"... say something like, presuming this is a man/woman you would check
him/her...": whenever I come across those slashbound pairings I wince, they're
just so awkward and mess up my reading flow.

You just made my day — thanks!

P.S. I must have a very low bar, now that I think about it...

~~~
feralimal
You and me, both :) All the best.

