URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Bad Manners and Brimstone
  HTML https://badmanners.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Life in General
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 16226--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: caroled
       Date: October 15, 2018, 7:49 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Mary Sunshine Rain link ---
       >
       > [quote author=TootsNYC link=topic=737.msg16069#msg16069
       date=1539472826]
       >
       > Last week we started a new song in choir at my church, and it
       begins with the female voices.
       >
       > The label above the text didn't say "women"--which is what it
       normally says. It said "ladies."
       >
       > However, when the song switched registered, it said "men."
       Not "gentlemen"; men.
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The best way to address a choir is by voice part.  Our voices
       are our instruments and they have names--Soprano, Alto, Tenor,
       and Bass.  It's no different than an orchestra that has flutes
       and oboes.
       It's also not universal that all women sing the higher voiced
       parts and the men that lower voiced parts.
       There is no reason at all to refer to singers by gender.
       [/quote]
       I agree with this... In my younger years I had a fairly good
       range from soprano, hitting a high C 2 octaves above middle C
       down to a high bass. It wasn't unusual for our choir director to
       have me sing tenor on some songs as we were fairly thin of
       members who could sing the "male parts". If needed I brought the
       bass up an octave if it was too low for me, but was still a
       different part from the alto or tenor.
       #Post#: 16230--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Hanna
       Date: October 15, 2018, 8:22 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Thrabalen link ---
       >
       > Calling a woman a "lady" is dominating. A lady is a woman who
       acts in a specific way, deferential and polite to men (thus,
       they are submissive).
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Your post described all of the words and meanings we take from
       them really well.
       But when I hear the term “lady” I tend to think first of the
       English title, and next of someone who carries themselves with
       an air of dignity. I was never taught that being a lady meant
       submitting to anyone else, in fact I always believed they got to
       tell others how to behave.
       #Post#: 16234--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Hmmm
       Date: October 15, 2018, 8:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Thrabalen link ---
       >
       > The root of the issue is language and how it pertains to
       humans. That is, the root of the word man is, well, Man. As is
       the root of the word woman. Language is frequently used to
       dehumanize, infantilize, or to dominate, and "females", "girls",
       "ladies" and the like are examples of this. Calling a woman a
       female is dehumanizing. A cat can be a female, a horse can be a
       female, but neither can be a woman. Calling a woman a girl is
       infantilizing. A girl is an immature woman, not possessing life
       experience enough to be trusted to make her own decisions.
       Calling a woman a "lady" is dominating. A lady is a woman who
       acts in a specific way, deferential and polite to men (thus,
       they are submissive).
       >
       > An adult human female is a *woman*. They are of Man. They are
       free to make their own decisions, and they are capable of being
       rational, thinking people. They have value beyond their gender.
       >
       > That is *not* to say that all people using the words this way
       are doing this, merely they are repeating learned behavior.
       >
       > Edited to add: When there is parity in terminology (i.e.,
       "females and males", "girls and boys", "ladies and gentlemen"),
       this obviously isn't as applicable!
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       What????
       Your idea of a woman who acts like a lady is very different than
       mine. If I refer to someone as being lady-like, they are
       confident, poised, intelligent, and are considerate to everyone,
       no matter their gender.
       #Post#: 16236--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Dazi
       Date: October 15, 2018, 9:10 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       My peeve with this is not with the use of ladies and men as
       dismissive or derogatory, but the fact that on sheet music it
       should be listed by VOICE.
       Soprano, alto, tenor, and bass.
       There are some men who are altos, especially younger
       teens/children. Most prepubescent teens will be soprano or alto
       regardless of biological sex. Some women are tenors.
       #Post#: 16237--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Thrabalen
       Date: October 15, 2018, 9:22 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Hmmm link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Thrabalen link=topic=737.msg16220#msg16220
       date=1539642256]
       > The root of the issue is language and how it pertains to
       humans. That is, the root of the word man is, well, Man. As is
       the root of the word woman. Language is frequently used to
       dehumanize, infantilize, or to dominate, and "females", "girls",
       "ladies" and the like are examples of this. Calling a woman a
       female is dehumanizing. A cat can be a female, a horse can be a
       female, but neither can be a woman. Calling a woman a girl is
       infantilizing. A girl is an immature woman, not possessing life
       experience enough to be trusted to make her own decisions.
       Calling a woman a "lady" is dominating. A lady is a woman who
       acts in a specific way, deferential and polite to men (thus,
       they are submissive).
       >
       > An adult human female is a *woman*. They are of Man. They are
       free to make their own decisions, and they are capable of being
       rational, thinking people. They have value beyond their gender.
       >
       > That is *not* to say that all people using the words this way
       are doing this, merely they are repeating learned behavior.
       >
       > Edited to add: When there is parity in terminology (i.e.,
       "females and males", "girls and boys", "ladies and gentlemen"),
       this obviously isn't as applicable!
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       What????
       Your idea of a woman who acts like a lady is very different than
       mine. If I refer to someone as being lady-like, they are
       confident, poised, intelligent, and are considerate to everyone,
       no matter their gender.
       [/quote]
       I am referring to the typical men's idea of a lady (refined and
       gentile, doesn't raise their voice, isn't disagreeable.) The
       word means different things to different people, as evidenced
       from this thread. But this is language used to reduce women,
       crafted by people out to do so.
       #Post#: 16238--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Hanna
       Date: October 15, 2018, 9:27 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Thrabalen link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Hmmm link=topic=737.msg16234#msg16234
       date=1539654410]
       > [quote author=Thrabalen link=topic=737.msg16220#msg16220
       date=1539642256]
       > The root of the issue is language and how it pertains to
       humans. That is, the root of the word man is, well, Man. As is
       the root of the word woman. Language is frequently used to
       dehumanize, infantilize, or to dominate, and "females", "girls",
       "ladies" and the like are examples of this. Calling a woman a
       female is dehumanizing. A cat can be a female, a horse can be a
       female, but neither can be a woman. Calling a woman a girl is
       infantilizing. A girl is an immature woman, not possessing life
       experience enough to be trusted to make her own decisions.
       Calling a woman a "lady" is dominating. A lady is a woman who
       acts in a specific way, deferential and polite to men (thus,
       they are submissive).
       >
       > An adult human female is a *woman*. They are of Man. They are
       free to make their own decisions, and they are capable of being
       rational, thinking people. They have value beyond their gender.
       >
       > That is *not* to say that all people using the words this way
       are doing this, merely they are repeating learned behavior.
       >
       > Edited to add: When there is parity in terminology (i.e.,
       "females and males", "girls and boys", "ladies and gentlemen"),
       this obviously isn't as applicable!
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       What????
       Your idea of a woman who acts like a lady is very different than
       mine. If I refer to someone as being lady-like, they are
       confident, poised, intelligent, and are considerate to everyone,
       no matter their gender.
       [/quote]
       I am referring to the typical men's idea of a lady (refined and
       gentile, doesn't raise their voice, isn't disagreeable.) The
       word means different things to different people, as evidenced
       from this thread. But this is language used to reduce women,
       crafted by people out to do so.
       [/quote]
       It seems like they are doing it wrong if not all of us are
       getting it.
       #Post#: 16240--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Thrabalen
       Date: October 16, 2018, 12:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Hanna link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Thrabalen link=topic=737.msg16237#msg16237
       date=1539656548]
       > [quote author=Hmmm link=topic=737.msg16234#msg16234
       date=1539654410]
       > [quote author=Thrabalen link=topic=737.msg16220#msg16220
       date=1539642256]
       > The root of the issue is language and how it pertains to
       humans. That is, the root of the word man is, well, Man. As is
       the root of the word woman. Language is frequently used to
       dehumanize, infantilize, or to dominate, and "females", "girls",
       "ladies" and the like are examples of this. Calling a woman a
       female is dehumanizing. A cat can be a female, a horse can be a
       female, but neither can be a woman. Calling a woman a girl is
       infantilizing. A girl is an immature woman, not possessing life
       experience enough to be trusted to make her own decisions.
       Calling a woman a "lady" is dominating. A lady is a woman who
       acts in a specific way, deferential and polite to men (thus,
       they are submissive).
       >
       > An adult human female is a *woman*. They are of Man. They are
       free to make their own decisions, and they are capable of being
       rational, thinking people. They have value beyond their gender.
       >
       > That is *not* to say that all people using the words this way
       are doing this, merely they are repeating learned behavior.
       >
       > Edited to add: When there is parity in terminology (i.e.,
       "females and males", "girls and boys", "ladies and gentlemen"),
       this obviously isn't as applicable!
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       What????
       Your idea of a woman who acts like a lady is very different than
       mine. If I refer to someone as being lady-like, they are
       confident, poised, intelligent, and are considerate to everyone,
       no matter their gender.
       [/quote]
       I am referring to the typical men's idea of a lady (refined and
       gentile, doesn't raise their voice, isn't disagreeable.) The
       word means different things to different people, as evidenced
       from this thread. But this is language used to reduce women,
       crafted by people out to do so.
       [/quote]
       It seems like they are doing it wrong if not all of us are
       getting it.
       [/quote]
       Words often have multiple meanings, and context is always
       important. Suppose I said you seemed mad... would I be saying
       you seemed angry or insane?
       In any event, the point I have been trying to make is that the
       most common words for a group of men retain the word Man (men,
       gentlemen), whereas the most common words for women do not. It's
       the reason I will not refer to a woman as anything but a woman,
       unless she asks me to. One's right to agency, to choosing who
       they are, is the overall end, and who am I to supersede that?
       #Post#: 16243--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Aleko
       Date: October 16, 2018, 4:27 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > Words often have multiple meanings, and context is always
       important.
       --- End Quote ---
       Indeed. And just because I am an etymology geek, here are the
       original meanings of some of the words that have been contested
       here:
       Wife: Old English wif (cognate with German Weib), meaning 'adult
       female'. The sense survives in compounds such as fishwife (woman
       who processes or sells fish for a living), housewife (woman who
       manages a house) and midwife. (The mid- element in this one
       means 'with' - as the German word mit does - so a midwife is
       literally someone who stays with a woman during childbirth. So
       etymologically it's not odd to call a man a midwife, if that's
       his vocation.)
       Man: Also Old English, (cognate with German Mann), primary
       meaning 'human being' as in 'mankind', but (because medieval
       Europeans were wildly sexist and assumed the male to be the norm
       from which the female was a deplorable-but-necessary divergence)
       quickly taken to mean specifically 'adult male'. Which led to
       the creation of the word -
       Woman: Old English wif-man, literally 'adult-female person'.
       Lady: Old English hlæfdige, literally 'loaf-kneader'. In
       Anglo-Saxon society the female head of the household had real
       status. If you had the keys of the stores, and knew how to make
       enough good wholesome bread with the flour you kept there to
       feed your family, servants and guests, you were a person to be
       reckoned with and looked up to. Your husband, whose obligation
       to the house was not to work in it but to protect it, its
       inhabitants and its contents, was the hlæfweard,  literally
       'loaf-guard', now spelt and pronounced 'lord'!
       Gentleman:  A much more recent word (by at least 500 years) than
       all the above, and much snobbier. The word gentle  in the Middle
       Ages meant 'well-born' (that is, belonging to a gens or clan
       that people had heard of), and it got its present meaning from
       the idea that only aristocrats were well-mannered, generous,
       kind and pleasant, whereas peasants were rough, harsh and rude.
       --- Quote ---
       > can you go into a room with all men and address them as Gals
       or Ladies or some such?
       --- End Quote ---
       Well, theoretically you could address a convention of bakers as
       'Ladies'. . . .
       #Post#: 16256--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: RubyCat
       Date: October 16, 2018, 8:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Really interesting background. I love etymology.
       #Post#: 16273--------------------------------------------------
       Re: ladies and men
   DIR By: Hanna
       Date: October 16, 2018, 10:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Thrabalen link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Hmmm link=topic=737.msg16234#msg16234
       date=1539654410]
       > [quote author=Thrabalen link=topic=737.msg16220#msg16220
       date=1539642256]
       > The root of the issue is language and how it pertains to
       humans. That is, the root of the word man is, well, Man. As is
       the root of the word woman. Language is frequently used to
       dehumanize, infantilize, or to dominate, and "females", "girls",
       "ladies" and the like are examples of this. Calling a woman a
       female is dehumanizing. A cat can be a female, a horse can be a
       female, but neither can be a woman. Calling a woman a girl is
       infantilizing. A girl is an immature woman, not possessing life
       experience enough to be trusted to make her own decisions.
       Calling a woman a "lady" is dominating. A lady is a woman who
       acts in a specific way, deferential and polite to men (thus,
       they are submissive).
       >
       > An adult human female is a *woman*. They are of Man. They are
       free to make their own decisions, and they are capable of being
       rational, thinking people. They have value beyond their gender.
       >
       > That is *not* to say that all people using the words this way
       are doing this, merely they are repeating learned behavior.
       >
       > Edited to add: When there is parity in terminology (i.e.,
       "females and males", "girls and boys", "ladies and gentlemen"),
       this obviously isn't as applicable!
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       What????
       Your idea of a woman who acts like a lady is very different than
       mine. If I refer to someone as being lady-like, they are
       confident, poised, intelligent, and are considerate to everyone,
       no matter their gender.
       [/quote]
       I am referring to the [glow=red,2,300]typical men's[/glow] idea
       of a lady (refined and gentile, doesn't raise their voice, isn't
       disagreeable.) The word means different things to different
       people, as evidenced from this thread. But this is language used
       to reduce women, crafted by people out to do so.
       [/quote]
       I do not believe the men I spend my time with have this idea you
       are describing nor do I experience them attempting to control or
       shame me into behaving a certain way with their language.
       But that is an interesting use of the word "typical" highlighted
       above. I think it's actually a good illustration of what you
       describe being done to women with language.  I hear "typical
       man" frequently used in an attempt to demean and degrade men. It
       really bothers me personally, because I like men and don't think
       they deserve to be treated that way any more than women do.
       *****************************************************
       Page 4 of 5
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page