Results 21 to 40 of 54
Persyn is the worst one.
Do they not understand that person comes from Latin "persona" (this is the Spanish word for person as well, and it's also an English word which has a different but related meaning than person)? The "son" in person has nothing to do with the "son" in English.
I do agree that it is pointless, and if anything sort of makes a mockery of women's oppression. Obviously people who spell it that way are going to do what they want, and it's easy enough just to ignore it. I do think the relationship between language and thought is dialectical, though (i.e. it isn't simply a one-way relationship; thought initially determines language, but then language reinforces thought - there is interaction between the two). I don't think the presence of 'man' and 'son' in words, particularly in light of the etymology of the words in question, has any effect whatsoever in terms of reinforcing thought with regard to sexism. There would be a somewhat better case for the casual use of words like '*****' and '****' and 'slut', etc. but that debate has obviously been had here so many times that the thought of having it again is almost mildly nauseating, and in the end I think it is more a question of courtesy rather than anything of particular political significance. But in that case as well, I suppose it could likewise be argued that it has the unintended consequence of making light of or neglecting the more central manifestations of women's oppression by honing in on what is the outmost peripheral expression of it.
In any case, I don't think it is of any importance either way. Spell it 'woman' or 'womyn', I really don't care at all.
I also agree with The Ungovernable Farce.
Once when I was quite stoned I came up with the idea (which I'm certain is not new) that rather than having the man/woman dichotomy, we could have man/woman/poman, with 'man' being 'human' and 'poman' being 'man.' I thought it was quite clever at the time.
Regardless, the fight over language use and syntax is very important to many struggles and it ought not be discounted. Granted that on a simplified level, the substitution of 'woman' for 'womyn' seems benign and rather fruitless, on a larger scale it is quite valuable. We are conditioned to become comfortable with what we learned and have used throughout our lives in language, and to challenge this seemingly absolute system can seem idiotic and childish.
Yet as many have mentioned, language and thought are bound up perhaps deeper and in a more complex fashion than we can understand. After all, we would not respond the same way towards blacks reclaiming the word n*****, or women attempting to reclaim the word c*** (or perhaps we would?).
Either way, it is not something to take issue with, as in doing so you place bonds on one person's attempt to break the level of current socio-economic-gender relations (however they wish to do so, and on whatever scale). These bonds cannot help but hamper this individual's efforts and hence the efforts of us all.
- August
If we have no business with the construction of the future or with organizing it for all time, there can still be no doubt about the task confronting us at present: the ruthless criticism of the existing order, ruthless in that it will shrink neither from its own discoveries, nor from conflict with the powers that be.
- Karl Marx
I'm sorry, but bastardizing (oh look, I just been discriminatory!) the English language, which I happen to love along with my native tongue, and the spanish language, and the Khmer language, and the Arabic language--is ridiculous, especially considering how these words aren't sexist in itself. how does woman somehow imply patriarchy? that's a rather stupid opinion if you ask me.
at worst if anything, it reflects on poor state of education in North America (I only seen it used in North American writing), where people don't understand the latin and old English roots of our language, and at best, it's annoying as hell.
Also, it's not very mature.
the English language isn't sexist; people who use it are.
there are my two cents...now you know...THE REST! of the story.
That's wrong, though. There are no equivalents for "old maid", "spinster"...etc for males in the English language.
I'm on some sickle-hammer shit
Collective Bruce Banner shit
FKA: #FF0000, AKA Mistake Not My Current State Of Joshing Gentle Peevishness For The Awesome And Terrible Majesty Of The Towering Seas Of Ire That Are Themselves The Milquetoast Shallows Fringing My Vast Oceans Of Wrath
yes there is, they have just fallen into archaic usage: Curmudgeon, old goat, etc.
on the other hand there is no female equivalent word for "bastard" (which in a historic sense, always implied a male child), "miser", "cuckold", or "milquetoast".
I would like to point out that while I feel changing the spelling is IMO petty, I feel it is more petty to dwell on such. You might as well go off on her for forgetting to use the apostrophe (I'm not sure if I'm spelling that right) but I find it kind of cool that she spelled womyn with a "y" intead of an "e". Also, I think as far as the hoxhaists go, I find Prairie Fire to be the most reasonable (not that I agree with the Hoxhaist thing, the 'anarkiddie' I am.)
I dreamt of a flower that was so beautiful that when it whithered away and died a tear left my eye. I saw our births, our lives and our deaths. I felt fire paint me with pain and I felt a kiss on my lips with a knife in my neck. Love to heartbreak to self-destruction to birth and to finally learning to frolic back into the same trap with a warm smile.
O|O
My blog: The Riot Slut Rage
I just don't get what the "y" is even for, considering that the word "woman" doesn't imply subordination or inferiority to males.
If Prairie Fire wants to spell it that way, why should we care? The word actually looks prettier to me with a 'y' so I find her spelling it that way kind of heartwarming.
I dreamt of a flower that was so beautiful that when it whithered away and died a tear left my eye. I saw our births, our lives and our deaths. I felt fire paint me with pain and I felt a kiss on my lips with a knife in my neck. Love to heartbreak to self-destruction to birth and to finally learning to frolic back into the same trap with a warm smile.
O|O
I hate letters with tails, so I'll abstain from using the word 'womyn.'Woman it is.
"Womyn" reminds me of Lord of the Rings.
Honestly though, I think the spelling change thing is a bit silly, but if people want to do it, all the power to them.
I guess.
We've got your war!
We're at the gates!
We're at your door!
We've got the guillotine...
I look at it from more of a spelling and English point of view. I'm all for changing the English language when new words enter our lexicon, yes--but "womyn" is based on a gross misunderstanding that the word "woman" is somehow implying inferiority.
maybe it's OCD, but everytime I see the word "women" or "woman" spelled with a "y", I want to yell "HEY YOU MADE A MISTAKE THERE YOU SPELLED IT WRONG"
I guess it's just me. I hate it when people spell words with "z" at the end instead of an "s" like they're (usually) supposed to, or use the number 3 as an E.
what the big fucking deal? it is 1 letter. it does not detract from what is said.
anyone who gets hung up over 1 letter is stupid.
If it were just a personal affection, I'd probably find it quite endearing, but I don't think it is. People who do this and spell America with lots of 'K's are presumably trying to make a political point, so I don't really think it is so out of order to comment on it.
Devrim
This.
I know it might well be unintentional but when people do these political spelling changes I think it comes across as talking down to people who use standard spelling (ie. the vast majority of the population!), it can come across like "What? You write woMEN?! You're such a patriarchal ARSEHOLE!" and I don't think that's particularly useful.
I don't mind people spelling things wrong just because that's a personal quirk but if it is to make a political point and people disagree with that point then surely those people have a right to say so?
What political point do you think they are trying to make and are you against it?
It is discussed in this thread:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/radical-fe...565/index.html
Devrim
"Language determines thought" seems to be rather idealist.
There is also the risk of sliding towards cultural essentialism or even the idea that one language or language family is superior to another.
I seem to remember a theory which suggests that the structure of the Indo-European language family is intrinsically more advanced than any other human language family, which is why Indo-Europeans are the most successful linguistic group of humans in history, having colonised much of the world's surface and created the majority of humanity's civilisation. Everything from Greek philosophy to modern science to Hinduism and Buddhism are ultimately Indo-European creations.
There is a new kind of racism these days, not based primarily on physical race or religion, but on language. In Turkey for instance there are pan-Turkic and pan-Altaic nationalists. The Turks are not an uniform physical racial group. Some Turks look more Mongolid while other look more Caucasian. Historically the ancestor of the Turks originated from Central Asia right on the border with China and are very much related to other Mongolid nomads like the Mongols and the Manchus. And although Turkey is a Muslim country, Turks are not very devout Muslims compared with Arabs and Iranians. So language is the main unifying factor for Turkic peoples.
