Wordcraft Home Page Wordcraft Community Home Page Forums Questions & Answers about Words Gender Question
Wordcraft Community Home Page Forums Questions & Answers about Words Gender QuestionPage 1 2
Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| Gender Question | Login/Join |
Member |
In Miss Manners' column, a reader said that she learned in her Women in Management course that "lady" is a sexist word because it refers to prostitution. I guess they are referring to "ladies of the night." Yet, I have always thought of "lady" as a respectful word. Do you consider "lady" sexist? Interestingly, Miss Manners asks why titles for females that start out as forms of respect, such as "mistress" and "madam" pick up "smutty" connotations, while the equivalent male ones, like "mister" and "sir" remain dignified? Any ideas? | ||
|
Member |
old master - his paintings are extremely valauble old mistress? not so valuable callboy - calls actors when it is time for them to go on stage call girl - different sort of acting | |||
|
Member |
Of course "lady" is not sexist, any more than "gentleman" is sexist. Simply because a word is misused (and rarely used) in a phrase such as "ladies of the night" there is no reason to stop using it. People who make such suggestions are obviously underemployed and seeking to justify their existence. | |||
|
Member |
I think the prostitute thing is misleading, but I am sure there was a decent reason why university toilets of the 1980s were labelled women rather than ladies. | |||
|
Member |
quote: It was to avoid misleading the occasional semi-literate Scotsman.  Why should I let the toad work Squat on my life ? Can't I use my wit as a pitchfork And drive the brute off ? Read all about my travels around the world here. Read even more of my travel writing and poems on my weblog. | |||
|
Member |
You might see the difference in terms of: "Woman" - An adult homo sapien possessing a vagina. "Lady" - An adult homo sapien possessing a vagina and a certain degree of class. Any connection with "ladies of the night" is so slight as to be nearly meaningless. As an ardent feminist for most of my adult life I believe the true complaint, possibly lost in repeated retellings often by those less than sympathetic to the cause, is in the inequality of terms used in ways that suggest parity. For example, the wedding line "I now pronounce you man and wife" has always irked me considerably. The man is a man on his own but the woman is just a wife. You might as well say "I now pronounce you man and wife-of-the-man" or "I now pronounce you man and possession." Similarly "men and ladies" (while not as common in speech but I see it all the time on restroom doors) suggests that boys will be boys and men will be troglodytes but that women, by virtue of their gender, will be held to a higher standard of decorum. I, for one, would rather associate with a "woman" than with a "lady." A "woman" thinks for herself, will ocassionally pick up the tab for a shared meal, will open a door for me if my hands are full, is not afraid to make a sexual overture if the mood strikes her, and is independent enough to want to be with me without needing to be with me. I am a man and my equal is a woman. Knowing as you all do that my ego can stretch from here to Cincinatti, any equal is, in my book, quite a person indeed! On the other hand, assuming she's not a member of British royalty, a person claiming the title of "lady" is either a real "Miss Priss" type, in which case I simply don't waste my time or hers with much in the way of interaction, or a woman decades older than me, in which case, yes, I very much do "treat her like a lady" as a matter of respect. And, while I'm on the subject, another group that falls under the "treat her like a lady" category -- Hookers! Yep. There's an old saying (and I apologize in advance if this offends) "Treat a whore like a lady and a lady like a whore." As sayings go, it's base, and crude, and politically incorrect, and insensitive, but damn if it doesn't ring true nine times out of ten! The finest of ladies will enjoy a degree of roughness (by which I don't necessarily mean physical) from a man while a far lowlier chambermaid greatly appreciates receiving the respect one might give her employer. The final test? I've pulled this twice, both time successfully, when someone has demanded to be considered a "lady." I'll make a rather course statement containing a curse word, pause a moment, and then tell her "Congratulations, you're not a lady." When she demands an explanation, I add "A lady would have fainted!" | |||
|
| Member |
Interesting, CJ. I can't say that I have thought of it as much as you have, but generally, I think, I prefer to be called a "lady." I have no real major preferences, though. My husband always tells the story of (I can't remember the beginning) "That's no lady; that's my wife!" However, the AHD seems to agree with CJ about the use of "woman" or "female" over "lady", except when in "polite society" (whatever that means!) Here is the quote from their Usage Note: "Lady is normally used as a parallel to gentleman to emphasize norms expected in polite society or in situations requiring courtesies: Ladies and gentlemen, your attention please. I believe the lady in front of the counter was here before me. The attributive use of lady, as in lady doctor, is widely regarded as condescending and inappropriate. When the sex of the person is relevant, the preferred term for this usage is woman. The adjectival form female is also acceptable; in fact, twice as many members of the Usage Panel prefer female and male to woman and man as modifiers in the sentence President Clinton interviewed both ___ and ___ candidates for the position of Attorney General." As far as weddings, I completely agree with CJ, detesting, "I now pronounce you 'man and wife'". Now you very consistently hear, "I now pronounce you 'husband and wife'", which makes a lot more sense. | |||
|
| Member |
I haven't heard it for years, but if a bloke told a dirty joke or swore in mixed company the cry would go up "Ladies present!", as a reminder that gentlemen were not expected to sully the innocent ears of ladies with such nasty stuff. Some twenty or so years ago I was in a group of about half a dozen at the bar of our sports club, and someone told a dirty joke. One of the older members came over, and, staring pointedly at the two girls in our group, said, "There are other ladies present, you know!" The implication, of course, was that the two with us weren't really ladies. I sometimes wonder if he ever realised how close he came to being flattened that day.  | |||
|
| Member |
quote: Actually, I don't think that was insulting at all. By referring to the women in your group as "ladies," he gave them a measure of respect while implying that the other "ladies" might not be so open minded in regards to being present while low humor (or whatever) was being discussed. On the other hand, had he said "There are Ladies present, this could have been translated as "It's OK to talk that way in the presence of the whores you're frequenting at the moment but please take into consideration the sensibilities of decent human beings." Then you could have slugged him! | |||
|
| <Asa Lovejoy> |
CJ, you like the term, "woman?" It seems to me that its etymology suggests possession just as does "wife." From OE wifman. "I now pronounce you partners!" How's that? OK, kinda lame, but equal. | ||
|
| Member |
Oh, and that reminds me of an answer by Tinman in a recent thread. | |||
|
| Member |
Tinman's post points out that wifman (the source of "woman") did not mean "wife of a man". Rather, at the time wif meant a female person (married or not), and the term for a male person was wer. The word man simply meant "person." So wifman simply meant a "female person," and there was a like term for "male person." (I don't know if man had yet acquired its other meaning of specifically a male.) Similarly, female did not evolve as a modification of the word male. Rather, it comes from Latin femina=woman, which evolved into femella, then to Old French femelle. The spelling changed to female because it was mistakenly thought to be parallel to "male." | |||
|
Member |
I am reminded of a story about the response of a female to the approaches of a male intent on sexual conquest and it goes thus: If a lady says "No", she means "Maybe"; if a lady says "Maybe" she means "Yes"; if a lady says "Yes", she's no lady! And to add my comments about the reason why many universities and other educational establishments substituted "women" for "ladies" I think it's simply a matter of so-called "equality". "Lady" means a female of "class" and class is something that would never be acceptable in the politically correct atmosphere of such an establishment! To attribute "class" to one person means that other persons might be thought to be inferior. Richard English | |||
|
| Member |
quote: And conversly,
| |||
|
| Member |
quote: I was going to let this slide by without comment but now, seeing it again, I'm afraid I can't. First off, R.E., there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that you had no intention of being either controversial or offensive with this post. However... Point one: The "If a lady says 'No,' she means 'Maybe'" is nothing more than a reflection of chronic male sexual hopefulness BUT I strongly feel that the rejoinder, "If a lady says 'Maybe,' she means 'Yes'", while a clever enough turn of phrase, is something that has been believed and, worse yet, acted upon by uncountable thousands of men over the years. The phenomenon of "Date Rape" is not a new one. Equating a "Maybe" with a "Yes," even in today's more enlightened times, is often the first step towards one of the ugliest crimes known to mankind. Point two: The "If a lady says 'Yes,' she's no lady" is, of course, 19th century bullshit. All consenting adults in private, male and female, have every right to do whatever they want, with whomever they want, whenever they want, and as often as they want. The years of "Nice girls don't" are long past, thank God, and anyone (and it's almost always a male) who looks down upon an unmarried woman because she happens to be no longer a virgin ought to get back into his horse & buggy and return to the rock he crawled out from under. Again, none of this is to be construed as an attack on R.E. This is a word board and while we (usually) try to avoid political topics, I'm posting this not to promote any feminist agenda but as a reminder that words have power. They not only reflect how we think but, moreover, can strongly influence how we think. And act! (Thus endeth the sermon. I'll get off my soapbox now.) | |||
|
| Member |
But remember I said "...I am reminded of a story about the response of a female to the approaches of a male intent on sexual conquest and it goes thus...: It is not my story and I said neither that I agreed nor disagreed with it. I happen to think it's funny and it is surely one of many reflections on the difficulty of verbal (as opposed to sexual) intercourse between ladies and gentlemen (or males and females if you prefer it)! Richard English | |||
|
| Member |
Well R.E., not to put too fine a point on it but if, as you say, you think the story is funny, funny enough to pass along, then you have, in effect, adopted it. It is now your story. Saying "I'm reminded of a story..." or "This is just something I once heard in passing..." gives the appearance that you're trying to put some distance between yourself and the story but such attempts are rarely 100% successfull. A far more offensive example of this (meaning your "offense," if I could even call it that, is of the most minor and trivial nature) one that I hear far too often, is when someone prefaces the most outrageously offensive racist joke by saying "I heard this from a black guy." As if that excuses what follows! Similarly, a woman once told me the one about the difference between "love" and "true love" (And, Good God, NO, if you haven't heard it, consider yourself lucky; I will not post it here!) a "joke" so loathsomely sexist as to inspire in its audience the desire for a mental enema, in this same spirit. She was a woman (and definitely not a "lady"; see elsewhere) and, therefore, somehow permitted to pass along ugliness of this sort. And as far as the orinigal line goes, I can even agree that it's funny as a turn of phrase although I totally stand by my comments regarding how ugly language can lead to ugly actions. I assume you're with me on this point. Again, allow me to state that my last post was not in any way an attack against you, R.E., BUT yes, that joke is now "yours." Use it wisely. | |||
|
| Member |
We will have to disagree on this. To recite another's composition does not make it ones own. It might imply a degree of acceptance or agreement with its viewpoint and to that extent I accept that one should choose, and use, wisely all compositions, whether they be ones own or those of others. I will climb off the fence, though, and say that I do not think the "lady" story is in any way sexist although I accept it requires a knowledge of the nuances of UK English (and of English culture) that might not be possessed by speakers of other forms of English, for it to be properly understood. Richard English | |||
|
| Member |
quote:I do think that the word "lady" has a very different connotation in the English culture, versus the American culture, because of the royalty use (I hope that terminology is accurate!) of the word "lady." | |||
|
| Member |
In England all ladies are women and all gentlemen are men. The converse is not true. Richard English | |||
|
| Member |
quote: That all ladies are men and all gentlemen are women ? Why should I let the toad work Squat on my life ? Can't I use my wit as a pitchfork And drive the brute off ? Read all about my travels around the world here. Read even more of my travel writing and poems on my weblog. | |||
|
| Member |
Yes. I suppose I should have said the respective converses. However, since neither of the converses, including yours, is true I feel that any misunderstanding will be entirely deliberate! Richard English | |||
|
| Member |
quote: I wasn't implying that the "original" (and, yes, "orinigal" was a typo; thanks all for not jumping me on it) joke was sexist per se. My point was that it reflected a certain type of ignorance all too prevalent in men (decidedly not "gentlemen") on both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere. What too many guys just don't get is that "Yes" means "Yes," "Maybe" means "Maybe" and etc. By intentionally blurring the distinctions among these words in the hopes of gaining sexual conquest of whatever sort, these cavemen-types commit assaults against both women and the English language. In other words, linguistic rape can be a stepping stone to the physical variety. (Again, I'll step down from my soapbox but, at the same time, I can't help but wonder: Where is the female participation in this discussion?) | |||
|
| Member |
quote:I have been reading this thread closely. The problem is, how many females (ladies? women?) are posting here now? WinterBranch and, very infrequently, Ros & TrossL (sob!), as well as yours truly. That's it! We need women!!!! Anyway, to respond, I agree with CJ as far as men needing to know that "yes" means "yes", "no" means "no", and "maybe" means "maybe." Heck, recently, a court in California even decided that "yes" can mean "no"! I have always been very lucky to have known good men. However, I do worry about my daughters. Yet, as far as the joke, I think we can take "political correctness" with jokes too far; is this one of those cases? I have heard the joke from my husband many times, and I had always thought it funny, and not offensive because "it reflected a certain type of ignorance all too prevalent in men." Yet, CJ is very persuasive in his argument. My answer is, I really don't know. However, I do know that Richard, in no way, meant to be offensive. I am sure that CJ knows that, too. And, I have learned from this site that cultural differences in the understanding of English is very important. I found one other point interesting in CJ's post. While he says that the "ignorance all too prevalent in men" is decidedly not seen in "gentlemen", he doesn't seem to give the same sort of prestige to "ladies." About ladies, he says, "I, for one, would rather associate with a 'woman' than with a 'lady.'" I assume, CJ, that you consider yourself a "gentleman" and not a "man?" Yet, you would rather associate with a "woman" and not a "lady?" I am confused.  [This message was edited by Kalleh on Fri Dec 12th, 2003 at 7:45.] | |||
|
| Member |
quote: | |||
|
Member |
I've been quiet on the topic because I've been thinking. I agreed with much of CJ's first post on the difference between a 'woman' and a 'lady'. I thought he made very good points and I didn't feel the need to add a 'me too!' to it. (The last time I frequented a bb/ng environment, just posting that sort of a thing was the sign of an idiot newbie.) Kalleh: quote: The oogiest (yes--oogiest) wedding I've been to was one in the past five years where they still used the line "love, honor, and obey". And...she was about seven years older than he was. That's all I'm saying about that. As far as the "Yes, No, Maybe" question. It's definitely a dated joke. It isn't unclever and I'm sure there was a time that it was the height of wit. I agree there was no intention of offense, (and I certainly took none), but yeah, the time of that type of comment has come and gone. As far as jokes go... Well, quite frankly, I have frequently crossed people's boundaries in making jokes. And then apologized profusely for offending them. I've offended young men, old ladies, transgendered individuals. I go for the funny. I never mean to offend and when I do, I stop. I apologize, and I try not to do it again. That's really all a person can do. | |||
|
| Member |
One more thing. In that same vein--I've felt for a long time that Andrew Dice Clay really got a raw deal. He expanded on a persona/shtick--and some of his act was very funny. Much wasn't. But I do feel his act got caught up in some (is the word I want gestalt)? Anyway, what was going on in the US at the time. Funny is funny; Clever is clever; And I don't have to agree with any of it.  | |||
|
| Member |
Thanks, WinterBranch, for checking in! quote:CJ, I am sorry, but you have already personified yourself as a "gentleman", both in your description of helping the woman down the icy steps and in your comments about "yes means yes", etc. I do think that the terms "lady" and "gentleman" are taken differently, at least here in the U.S. Only today when I was leaving our company's Christmas party, a 20-something man said, "Have a nice day, Ladies." The 30-something woman I was with said, "I hate it when men call me a lady." You can imagine how I perked up at that comment! I said, "Why?" She said that she didn't mind older men calling her a "lady", but she felt that it was arrogant of younger men to do so. I have to say, I hadn't felt that way at all. I rather like being called a "lady", though it seems I am in the minority here in the U.S. | |||
|
| Member |
While, I don't want to bring up the joke about ladies again, I did read in Dear Abby today another version in her Thought for the Day: "If a diplomat says yes, he means maybe. "If a diplomat says maybe, he means no. "If a diplomat says no, he's no diplomat!" ~Andre Gabor | |||
|
| Member |
That was no diplomat - that was my wife!! | |||
|
| Member |
quote: Somehow that seems familiar. Let me hasten to add that I am neither Dear Abby nor Andre Gabor. Obviously the illuminati are reading my posts. [beaming with quiet pride] | |||
|
| Member |
I missed that Hic. You deserve the Wordcrafter Emmy for the day! BTW, my youngest daughter was home from the University of Southern California over the holidays. We were out and some nice young man said, "Have a good day, Ladies!" I asked her what she thought of the word. She reiterated my colleague's thoughts above, though with more detail. She said that she doesn't mind being called a "lady." However, her feminist friends do, she says. The reason? It identifies the gender of the person. No one would ever say, "Have a good day, Gentlemen." She said that by identifying the gender, one assumes the woman then has less power and is the weaker person. I must say, I missed out on all of this throughout the years, and I think I am glad about that! | |||
|
| Member |
quote: I would. Why should I let the toad work Squat on my life ? Can't I use my wit as a pitchfork And drive the brute off ? Read all about my travels around the world here. Read even more of my travel writing and poems on my weblog. | |||
|
| Member |
I would only say it to an all male group! If it were an all-female group then I'd say "Have a good day, ladies" If mixed, then "Have a good day, ladies and gentlemen" In England it's considered perfectly good mamners to call ladies, ladies and gentlemen, gentlemen. Richard English | |||
|
| Member |
quote: I would as well. Maybe it's a British thing? | |||
|
| <Asa Lovejoy> |
After considerable higher-order cogitation, I've concluded that the gender question at hand is a mondegreen. Some women confuse "laid ease" with "ladies."  | ||
|
Member |
The sign in the window of a store in downtown Hilo (between a hardware store and a Thai restaurant) identifies it as "The Lady's Room." Due to heavy traffic and lack of available parking space I have not yet investigated. One wonders, "Which Lady?" Do other questions come to mind? | |||
|
| Member |
quote: Not particularly British at all. I use it all the time for, as above, an all-male group. If it's a mixed group the appellation becomes "folks." (Although if it's a group of Southerners it may turn into "Have a good day, y'all!") It's simply adaptive (chameleon-like) behavior. (Cross-thread: "chameleon" - now THERE's a beckoning anagram! MELANCHOE, HOMELANCE, ...) | |||
|
| Member |
quote: Of course they would! quote: I don't understand the logic. I think some women object to being called ladies because it sounds patronizing to them. Other people object because it sounds euphemistic. Words such as lady, gentleman, ma'am and sir are often used euphemistically (or courteously, if you prefer) for woman and man. The problem is, those words can carry a range of connotations. Many people use them to be "polite". Others use them condescendingly. Someone may refer to a group of women as ladies, out of polit [This message was edited by tinman on Sat Jan 10th, 2004 at 11:03.] | |||
|
| Member |
I remember once I posted that I always say, "May I please have a cup of coffee?"...never saying, "Can I have a cup of coffee?" CJ laughed at me, not saying I was being pretentious (and perhaps not completely accurate?), but implying it. So I decided to watch myself. Lo and behold, CJ was right! I found myself saying, "Can I have a cup of coffee?" or on my good days, "Can I please have a cup of coffee?" Once in awhile I'd say "May I please have a cup of coffee," but surely not consistently. My point? I don't think any of you really would say, "Have a good day, Gentlemen!", especially those of you in the U.S. You may think you would, but watch yourselves closely and see if you do. I don't think so. I have never heard it, though I have heard the ladies comment often. Tinman, the point my daughter made seemed quite logical to me. I am not sure how to say it more clearly. In the "ladies" case the person is pointing out the gender, while that is not commonly done (one has to assume that, I suppose) with men. | |||
|
| Member |
quote: quote: You've never heard it?. I bet you have and just don't remember it. For one thing, anyone who says, "Have a good day, gentlemen", is most likely not speaking to you, so there's a possibility you're not listening carefully. And why should you? No, I wouldn't say "Have a good day, Gentlemen". But, then, I wouldn't say "Have a good day, ladies", either. Those who do use that phrase may end it with "ladies", "gentlemen", or "ladies and gentlemen", whichever is appropriate. If you listen carefully, I bet you'll hear all three variations. As I said in my earlier post, people sometimes use "ladies" to be polite. They don't generally use it to intimidate, or to imply that the women have less power or are weaker. And for women to assume a man is trying to intimidate them by calling them ladies is being very presumptive, perhaps even biased. Ending a phrase with "ladies" does identify the group as women (usually), but why does that offend? And why do you say "one has to assume" that is not commonly done with men? In your first post you said no one [man] would ever say, "Have a good day, Gentlemen". In your last post you said that you didn't think that any man would use it, because you had not heard it said. Then, finally, you said that "one has to assume" it is not commonly used by men. As a literalist, you must realize that "not ever" means "not at any time", while "not commonly" means "not most of the time". I've heard women refer to themselves as ladies, but I don't recall ever hearing men calling themselves gentlemen. I've heard both men and women call women ladies, and I've heard them call men gentlemen. Tinman | |||
|
| Member |
quote: I would and I do. Now I agree that I don't always say it , even in all male company because I'm aware that it sounds like an affectation but I do - I confess with a certain conscious and deliberate pomposity - usually greet my friends with "Good evening gentlemen." I also say things like "I'll take my leave of you then gentlemen and see you again next week.". I use "ladies" in the same way. I greet my female colleagues and my female students with "Good morning ladies." The very idea that this is sexist rather than polite seems to be solely in the minds of certain people (note that I have intentionally chosen a genderless noun as there are men as well as women with this frame of mind.) One of the problems with sexism, racism sizeism and any other -ism is that the more extreme examples of it tend to start life solely in the minds of a few people with an axe to grind and gradually spread to others so that suddenly offence is being taken at perfectly innocuous or even - as is the case here - perfectly polite and correct expressions. I shall no more stop using "ladies" than I shall stop using "gentlemen". (The reason that you wouldn't have heard me use either in London, Kalleh, was of course that there were only one lady and one gentleman present and I no-one would use the expression "lady and gentleman"  )Every silver lining has a cloud. Read all about my travels around the world here. Read even more of my travel writing and poems on my weblog. | |||
|
| Member |
I would probably not use the precise expression "...Have a good day, gentlemen...", simply because we, in the UK, don't use the expression "...have a good day..." (unless you're working in McDonald's, of course) But, as I said previously, I use "ladies and gentlemen" very frequently and would probably use it were I addressing a group in the USA. As an aside, the only time I had a problem with group address was when I used an Americanism when I was at University. I was reporting back on a group activity and, to check that I had covered all the points, I turned to my mixed-sex group and said, "...is that everything, guys...? The lecturer went into orbit since she resented the implication that she was "a guy". However, the use of the masculine to refer to a group was one that was certainly common about ten years ago in the USA, I feel sure, even if it's no longer used. The lecturer was, as is so often the case in those kinds of extablishments, very pc. She would not, for example, allow me to use the term "master copy" insisting that I referred to it a "original copy". Richard English | |||
|
| <Asa Lovejoy> |
She would not, for example, allow me to use the term "master copy" insisting that I referred to it a "original copy". _____________________________________ And what if you had called it the "mistress copy?" PS: "Have a good day" and patronizing McDonald's are mutually exclusive. | ||
|
| Member |
Hoo, I guess I started something! First and foremost, remember, the dislike of the word "lady" has never, and will never, come from ME. So, Bob, when I visit you again, feel free to call me Lady Kalleh! My point was that the younger generation in the U.S. feels that way. I enjoy being called a lady because to me it connotes a courteous, sophisticated woman. However, my younger colleagues and my daughter and her friends just don't agree.Tinman, okay, you are right (per usual!), I shouldn't have said that men "never" say "Have a good day, Gentlemen." Further, I would not be so bold as to make conclusions about the use of "gentleman" in the UK! Instead, I should have said that while I have heard "Have a good day, ladies." numerous times in the U.S., I have never ONCE heard it in relation to "gentlemen." Have a good day "guys," I have heard (for Richard's point, more on "guys" later). I consider "guys" to be more nebulous as to gender than "gentlemen" is. Now, Tinman, if you think it is biased for women to assume weakness if men call women "lady," you may be interested in this comment from the AHD: "The attributive use of lady, as in lady doctor, is widely regarded as condescending and inappropriate." The point is that people have different connotations for words. I would have never quibbled with "lady doctor," either, though I see that I am more oblivious than most to feminists' thoughts. Bob, I get the impression that this "lady" issue is an American one, so please continue using "ladies!" Interesting, Richard, that you bring up "guys." Shu and I had a big discussion of this thread last night, and while he agreed with me that men don't usually call other men "gentlemen" here, he said they use "guys." Well, I think that "guys" means either men or women or a mixture of the two. I used to call my students "guys" all the time, and often there would be one or two men, with the rest being women. Funnily, as Shu and I left the Irish Pub that we love last night, the man at the door, said, "Have a nice night, guys!" | |||
|
| Member |
As an Instructor at Providence College, Taiwan's only women's college, in Taichung, I frequently greeted my nubile Chinese students with "Good morning, Ladies!" And those in Creative Writing with "Good morning, Writers!" One of my more outstanding students once said in a speech, "Mr. Thomas called me a Writer, and I became one." | |||
|
Member |
quote: An original is by definition not a copy, and copy is by definition not an original. The phrase "original copy" is a complete oxymoron. A matter of some importance to lawyers, who may be required to submit into evidence original documents, not copies. I repeat, with heat: an original is not a copy. | |||
|
| Member |
quote: That's a different case and I tend to agree with it to some extent. It wouldn't occur to me to use "lady" or "gentleman" in this adjectival fashion unless it had some relevence to the conversation. (At the doctor's surgery this morning (I have a bad back) I heard the receptionist tell a moslem woman that she could come back this afternoon if she wished and see a lady doctor. In that context it's pertinent, in others it isn't.) I often wonder how German feminists get on because in German almost all professions are identifiable as male or female because the word is different. For example Metzger and Metzgerin for a male and female butcher or Arzt and Ärztin for a male and female doctor. It must make life for the overly enthusiastic feminist quite difficult. Every silver lining has a cloud. Read all about my travels around the world here. Read even more of my travel writing and poems on my weblog. | |||
|
| Member |
The word "guys" as used in "have a good day, guys" is, of course, of American in origin, although it is used quite commonly used over here in the UK nowadays. In the plural, I have always understood it to mean persons of either sex, and the AHD definition No. 2 at Dictionary.com agrees with me. However, in the singular, it seems to refer to men only. I can therefore understand (if not agree with) people who think that it is slighting to women in the same way that "men" is alleged to be, because "men" too can be used for persons of either sex. We have, of course, discussed this use of "men" at length elsewhere. | |||
|
Copyright © 2002-12