womyn's rhetoric

[djtj]

just out of curiosity, but how many of you in the debate community think the term "chick" is degrading when applied to the female sex?

[zacariasla]

i use the terms
"chick" as to describe a girl i am partial too and possibly dont know that well
"broad" to describe someone ive never met or am not to fond of
"darlin'" in conversation with women(picked it up at PRP)


am i wrong on any of this
zack

[Tutakai]

Don't think the Dixie Chicks would find it demeaning. By claiming the term, they claimed power over it.

[USC MissingLink]

I personally find spelling "women" with a "y" offensive. Give me a break...

jEd

[truthisjust]

how can spelling womyn with a "y" be offensive? You make think it is too PC, but offensive... really? I began spelling it with a "y" because I had an ethics teacher who would not have it any other way. It you spelled it with an "e" or an "a" it would be counted as a typo.

[USC MissingLink]

the fact that a teacher imposed the spelling is one reason i find it offensive. spelling a word wrong does nothing to foster unity and instead emphazises the separation (or to use a debate term, othering) of genders.

like double-speak which removed ideas from society, "womyn" attempts to remove the idea of men from women. Of course, since both words use man/men, there's no reason women shouldn't remain the same and man be changed to myn. By changing the spelling of women you are phisically and semantically separating women from men and bestowing power on "men" as the important word.

Plus, I think that political correctness silences speach and ignores intentions.

jEd

[Dan6814]

Is anyone aware of an alteration of the word 'female?' Have feminists conceded the male/female word structure, while focusing on man/womyn?

Dan P.

[truthisjust]

Dan,

I don't know if this really helps answer your question but I think that most feminists would agree that there is a differnce between male/female and womyn/man. The former being biological (though this is still in heated debate) and the latter being socially constructed.

[truthisjust]

I would contend that the differnce between man being spelled myn and wome/an being spelled womyn is that man is the root of the word womyn, not the other way around. Granted, if men changed the spelling this would not be the case. However, typically a non-oppressed group is not really going to do something to aid the oppressed gourp when clear benifits come from not doing.

[DreinCali]

I say "chick" all the time, especially in reference to myself...When people say offensive things about women using 'chick,' 'babe,' etc. it is usually how they are saying it more than what they are saying.
Dan, I'm convinced there is a spelling variant on female, I just can't remember it...maye it's on some website somewhere...I'll look later...

[Eagle of Meaux]

let me make something clear: Man is *not* the root word of woman. this is a very common misconception, and understandably so, but it is still very incorrect.

The word woman is in actuality derived from the Old English word "wifmann." Mann was a term for a non-gendered human being. Wif evolved to mean wife. Eventually, wifmann it evolved into the Middle English word womman and its plural wimman. Now we have the further modified words woman and women.
While the assumption of the wif "wife of" is certainly objectionable changing the a/e to a y does nothing to deal with this. I does also creates a visible symbol of critique and an easy, and unfortunately accurate way for opponents of the women's movement to claim that it is based on flawed precepts.
Hope this doesn't offend anyone, its just the truth as I know it.

Keith

[truthisjust]

when i said root I did not mean to infer that it is the origin. I meant that "man" is part of the word "woman." Sorry for the confusion.

[kikimal13]

I agree with Andrea that chick is all about who's saying it and what context it is in.

[Eagle of Meaux]

no prob Justin.

Keith

[pattybar]

I find 'womyn' offensive simply because it implies a distinction between the 'good womyn' and the rest of us not-as-good women. I actually know a former debater who was told by her own DOF/Feminist comm person that she wasn't "a good womyn (spelling implied)" if she did debate... and silly me, I thought feminism was about creating chioces for women, guess not..... if they are the wrong choices.

That DOF is (obviously) not doing the job anymore. They just hired her in via the DOF slot to get her on the faculty.

As for 'chick' I actually have a double standard much along the lines of Andrea's. If a guy says it with a leer in his voice, I find it icky... but, I use it to refer to myself and/or my friends. In some ways it is like an African-American person using 'the N word'.... it is ok with me for one woman to call another a 'chick' or a 'chica', but guys need to be careful with it.

Patty

[Western Amy]

I think, just like every other word, the use of the word "womyn" depends on its context. If someone is using it to say that they're right and you're wrong, then it's no better than any other word. On the other hand, it can (and in my experience, has) been used by males and females alike in an effort to show respect for those who carry the chromosomes. I don't use it myself, but it's quite common on campus and is no longer a big deal to me.

On the other hand, I have expereienced what Patty is talking about. As a freshman on the team, I had a very well-meaning senior debater continually correct me when I referred to myself as "girl" or anyone else who was not under the age of 12. This turned me off on the whole "PC" rhetoric and made me feel as though it was being used to dominate, not include, me.

On the other hand (yes, I have 3), when we use the word "PC" we diminish our understanding of trying to use words that include everybody. What does PC mean anyway? Politically correct according to whom? Ashcroft certainly wouldn't use the words "womyn" or "womn" and i bet the majority of the American population doesn't.

To characterize something as politically correct is to ignore the reasons the word is used and therefore justify rejecting it. Justin's used the word on NB as long as I can remember, but I've never heard him judge others for not using it, or tell them that they're wrong.

Amy

[DreinCali]

Just an anecdote...Last year I was trying out for the 1st UCLA Women's Oratorical Contest. During the course of my speech I called the audience "women" most of the time, though I also used "girls" and "ladies" once. The first one was in a girl powre sort of way, the second one was more joking than anything else. Still, the girl (Whoops! Woman!) in charge told me she loved my speech but could I please use "women" exclusively. It was weird, but she seemed to care about it a lot more than I did, and she was nice, so I changed it. I wound up winning the contest and getting a handshake from Blossom, but I always wondered if I shouldn't have let her intimidate me.

By the way, the reason I sometimes use girl instead of woman is sometimes I don't think of myself as old enough to be one...classic Britney syndrome! :)

Dre

[USC MissingLink]

is there difference between calling a male a boy and a female a girl?

jEd

[SpeaknSmile]

I use guy and gal/girl usually in reference to my peers. Is there anything wrong with these terms? I am coming to the realization that we read a lot into language when maybe there was nothing to read into.

I agree that it can be offensive is a stranger calls me a b* or girl, but when friends do it then it can mean something completely different. However in having a discussion in a pol sci class(in the context of hate speech) we got into a heated debate about where we draw a brightline. So I turn the question(well many questions) to this board:

Is there a universal standard on language? How can we tell the intention behind a word or statement? And if there is no standard how can we prosecute hate speech or verbal sexual abuse? When is it friendly joking and when does it stop being so? Can we prosecute soley on individuals feeling offended or does this turn into a slippery slope? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/intl/aenglish/images/emoticons/ohwell.gif ALT=":\">

Carol

[Western Amy]

I think that there is a difference, because we have the term "guys" for when boy or man will not do and nothing in common parlance to subsitute for girl and woman. ("ladies" doesn't work, too formal and also has the correpsonding word "gentlemen")

I do occasionally use "boy" when talking among my female friends. (Sample sentence "boys are trouble")

<img src=http://www-scf.usc.edu/~link/netbenefits/emoticons/bouncegrin.gif ALT=":grin">

[USC MissingLink]

gals?

[SpeaknSmile]

Jed was the ? for an definition or had you never heard of it?

Carol

[USC MissingLink]

I'd heard of it. It was a response to Amy's claim that there was no female equivalent to "guys"

jEd

[SpeaknSmile]

another response to that is the good ole musical "Guys and Dolls" :D

Carol

[USC MissingLink]

Frankly, I feel sorry for anyone who is really (seriously) concerned about the spelling of women or being called a girl. If they get bothered by that they're probably going to be angry for most of thier lives.

jEd

PS - Audrey, I know I gave you shit about calling John and I boys, but that was in jest...

[truthisjust]

look I am not militant about it... I just perfer that way of spelling it. I do think it is the superior way but like I said, I don't think it matters a great deal. I have never given someone shit for spelling it any other way nor do I think people who spell it any other way are bad people. Just to clarify... you spell it yours... I will spell it mine...

[USC MissingLink]

okay, but see, it's not that easy. My way is supported by quite a few dictionaries. You are spelling it wrong for political reasons. My spelling is politically neutral, so there's really nothing to disagree with. Your spelling is politically volitile so I can disagree with the politics of your spelling.

jEd

[truthisjust]

the point of contention seems to whether or not your way is politically neutral... I don't think it is. My reasoning is not because I am trying to be PC (believe me I am not PC at all) but because I think that is it slightly less oppressive to spell it that way. And why does the spelling in the dictionary matter... that is a simple appeal to authority.

Its like if I were a vegitarian. I am not trying to make you a vegitarian... so why does it matter to you.

[Western Amy]

Jed, it sounds to me like all you're doing is trying to pick a fight. Maybe you're more bored than Justin, but that's not a good reason. His spelling is supported by quite a bit of literature as well, and it's possible to cite lit on either side to say who is spelling it "right" or "wrong". There are many people who would argue that your way of spelling it is not politically neutral. It being traditional not only doesn't make it nonpolitical, it could be construed as an embracing of tradition, which is itself a policial statement (just ask Phyllis Schlafly)

[USC MissingLink]

personally, i could care less that you personally spell it wrong. this is nothing against you and i think that your intentions are probably valid.

i just find it ironic that in the quest for equality, someone would act to separate women and men. and i don't think that my spelling is political; at least it is not encoded that way. when I type an "a" or and "e" I'm not thinking oh, boy, time to subjugate some females. The fact that somone else read - or decode - political meaning into my spelling doesn't speak to my meaning. In fact, that person is adding meaning where I intend none.

However, when someone spell it with a "y" they are encoding meaning into the word. I personally disagree with that meaning because I don't think that they way to equality is to focus on difference.

But, like I said, you say potato, I say potato. You say womyn, I say women. We don't need to call the whole thing off... <img src=http://www-scf.usc.edu/~link/netbenefits/emoticons/love.gif ALT=":love">

jEd

[truthisjust]

I dont see equality as the end goal of feminism... I see the destruction of dominance as the end goal (as hooks advocates)...

[USC MissingLink]

okay, "the destruction of dominance" would mean that no one dominates. Men or women. Seems to me that "destruction of dominance" is just a militant way of saying equality. Am I missing a nuance of meaning?

jEd

[Western Amy]

Well, calling it "militant" kind of misses the point. Actually, i tend to think of "militant" as being combative (maybe that's because that's what the dictionary says, since you seem to put so much stock in that). Therefore, removing dominance is actually the opposite of being militant.

[Western Amy]

In addition, the difference between removing dominance and achieving equality is how it's done. Liberal feminists believe that equality is achieved by taking away the institutions (like laws) that discriminate. Radical feminists (correct me if I'm wrong) believe that the problem is deeper than that, that it comes from patriarchy. So the aims are usually differently described by the two. Also, marxist-feminists believe that the problem is the dominance of capitalism, eco-feminists believe that patriarchy helps destroy the earth, there are many variations.

But, since you're feeling excluded, I want to add that bell hooks also wrote the book "Feminism is for Everybody"

Amy

[StarDancingGirl]

Everybody should read some bell hooks...she's wonderful...I like especially how she she connects ALL forms of oppression (well, at least she links racism, sexism, and classism) and critiques pretty much everyone <img src=http://www-scf.usc.edu/~link/netbenefits/emoticons/gavel.gif ALT=":gavel"> ...her definition of feminism, though, is "the struggle to end sexist oppression" (in Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, p. 2:cool: , and she's definitely not anti-male, although she is anti-patriarchy. (to get off on a little tangent...hooks is one of my favorite topics to get off on a tangent about ;) )