Members banned from this thread: Amelia and John T Ford


Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 107
Thanks Tree47Thanks

Thread: Proper English Sexism

  1. #21
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    56,810
    Thanks
    32690

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by syrenn View Post
    yeah... sorry no. I prefer to speak proper English as opposed to...... proper total bullshit make me feel good participate in my therapy pc idiotic speak.
    I tried that myself, @syrenn. People under 50 can no longer understand me, and besides, I like some of their expressions. I knew that my speech was incurably corrupted the first time I actually said "LOL" in a spoken convo.

    That was in the '90's. These days, I feel grateful if my kid does not text me with ONLY emojis. Actual words, of any sort, are my new hill to die on.

    Last edited by Madeline; 26th December 2017 at 05:59 PM.

  2. #22
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    56,810
    Thanks
    32690

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    I believe it is a dichotomy that feminists language changers have created. "He" in Article II is a gender neutral indefinite pronoun or a pronoun for "President," which is gender nuetral. The other words they want to change are gender neutral indefinite pronouns.
    Have you ever read "The Second Sex"? Symbols have power.

    Granted, possibly not the same power they had in the 1970's, but neither is sexism a thing of the past.
    Thanks from Isalexi

  3. #23
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    56,810
    Thanks
    32690

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Chief View Post
    I'm against gender neutrality. I have a gender and so does my wife. It doesn't matter to me if a person addresses us as Mrs. Chief and Mr. Chief. Heck, I'll chuckle if we are addressed as Mrs Chloe and Mr. Chloe and won't be harmed in the least. I think we are inconveniencing 99.9% of people for the marginal benefit of the .1% who would be better off just learning to get over it.

    For the record, I am for empowerment of everyone and against sexism. I believe that men and women are of equal quality, but are not identical. I believe that all should have equal opportunity, but that standards should not be changed to artificially divide up things between the sexes. I am not against equal pay between the sexes, but I think its unclear that sexism drives pay disparity. (Males may pursue raises more aggressively resulting in more pay increases, rather than companies deliberately paying them more than females, as an example) One thing I am very against is knee jerk overcorrections... and this feels like that.

    I saw that in the Navy too... the Navy is seriously looking at removing "man" from rates. So, now it's a problem that a job title is called Yeoman. Let's not forget to get "man" out of woman too, because we wouldn't want the wo to be harmed.

    It's just getting silly.
    What a lovely, lovely man you are, sir.


  4. #24
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    56,810
    Thanks
    32690

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    I don't think anyone is suggesting that we should take gender away from actual human beings whom we name specifically. We're talking about situations where we mean a generic human, not a man or a woman but a person whose gender is not known.

    I don't know what's appropriate for the military. I know that we often replace "Chairman" with simply "Chair" in my line of work. But I don't think that "Yeo" would work too well. <chuckle> But not all military ranks indicate gender (Ensign, Lieutenant). Perhaps the few that do could be replaced by something completely different? I do understand that the generic "Mister" you use in the Navy might be particularly problematic.
    Ahhhhhhhh. I am beginning to love this thread.

    Thank you, Daddio.

    Thanks from Rasselas

  5. #25
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    9,622
    Thanks
    3024

    There is no good comedy or drama without language. And don't give me that Charlie Chaplan shit. I know there is not literally nothing you can do, but it is severely limited without language. And the more virtuosity one has with the language, the better the ideas can be expressed, the better the imagery, or the analogy. Rejecting language in favor of snippets of pseudo communication is not evolution or progress, any more than book burning. I will die on the hill next to you.

    And yes, I will grotesquely violate and mangle my language to suit my desires. Being able to use it properly, though, is a prerequisite for that kind of thing. Deliberately twisted grammar, punctuation, deliberately mixed metaphors, deliberately un-parallel lists...these can all be used to create depth or humor. And no, this is not the same as never learning how things are supposed to work in order to add depth by deliberately wronging things up. So before some barely literate monkey tries to make the comparison, be advised that you are wrong. Furthermore, it is possible that your failure to grasp the nuances of your own language may have had dire consequences, including an insensitivity to the depth contained within others' words, or, worse yet, an inability to string the ideas themselves together within your own head, clearly and logically. In a nutshell, lazy language can be not an effect of lazy thinking, but a cause of lazy thinking.

  6. #26
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    9,622
    Thanks
    3024

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    I don't know what's appropriate for the military. I know that we often replace "Chairman" with simply "Chair" in my line of work. But I don't think that "Yeo" would work too well. <chuckle> But not all military ranks indicate gender (Ensign, Lieutenant). Perhaps the few that do could be replaced by something completely different? I do understand that the generic "Mister" you use in the Navy might be particularly problematic.
    In Star Trek TNG they just call everybody "sir". Ol' Gene Roddenberry is a bit of a time capsule, if you look at it. The original Star Trek, with the mini skirts, the only woman on the set was a secretary/sex symbol. By TNG, the chief medical officer was a woman, with the authority to remove the captain from active duty. Not to mention the chief of security. How's that for a middle finger to stereotypes?

    Nothing is perfect, but the differences between those two shows are so profound, that has to mean something. Perhaps what means even more is that people who watch that show hear a man called "sir" and move on pretty quickly, until you don't even hear it. "Oh, that's a gender neutral military term to address an officer. Got it. Let's move on." People are not in open rebellion over the changes. "There's a female as chief security officer? Okay. Let's move on."

  7. #27
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    56,810
    Thanks
    32690

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    There's a great deal more to that book than just a discussion of language. It's almost a thousands pages!
    Yeah, I recall that. It's still a fabulous discussion of THIS topic, but you are correct. Of so much more, too.

    Why do we need one? Why is it essential that we distinguish between the singular and the plural "you?" And if we do, what does that have to do with gender-inclusivity?
    @Isalexi took umbrage at my use of the phrase "you guys" in another thread. I don't hear it as gendered, anymore than I hear "all y'all" that way, but she does.

    So, this entire thread is her fault.

    ENGLISH teacher, doing that English language thang.

    LOL.


  8. #28
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    65,533
    Thanks
    37084

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Yeah, I recall that. It's still a fabulous discussion of THIS topic, but you are correct. Of so much more, too.
    True confessions: I read it when I was like 16. I was hoping it would help me figure out girls. LOL. Obviously, not that kind of book.
    Thanks from Madeline

  9. #29
    Moderator Nicnam's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    13,562
    Thanks
    3526

    From
    .
    Thread Ban Notice

    Amelia has been banned from this thread.

    Please do not refer or respond to their posts.

    Thank You.


  10. #30
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    504

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Have you ever read "The Second Sex"? Symbols have power.

    Granted, possibly not the same power they had in the 1970's, but neither is sexism a thing of the past.
    I have not read the book. I do know about her via her relationship with Satre, her Nazi ties with Radio Vichy, her penchant for pedophilia, and her disdain for marriage and family. I doubt that her writings
    would have anything to offer me.

    I believe the majority of women are equal to or surpass men because they live their lives as equal, believe they are equal on their own merits, and make their own way. I also believe there are women who believe that altering the dictionary is what it takes to be equal to men.

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 100% Proper Self-Defense
    By Madeline in forum Current Events
    Replies: 305
    Last Post: 27th June 2016, 04:01 PM
  2. Proper Pricing
    By william the wierd in forum Economics
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11th June 2011, 03:40 PM
  3. Proper Protocol?
    By Gypsy in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 25th November 2009, 01:08 PM
  4. The Proper Course of Action
    By Pragmatist in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 25th October 2007, 03:49 PM

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed