Reminds me of a mediation I was sort of part of, where a pure-breed female dog was unsuccessfully inseminated by another of that breed. "Bitch" and "Stud" were used liberally, and, of course, accurately...

(It was a small claims court, we mediated, and the resulting decision--validated by the small claims judge--was: the person who owned the bitch got the pick of a litter from a bitch owned by the person with the stud. A result that would never have occurred had it gone to a judge. Both parties were satisfied with the result, if not exactly happy.)

~erik hoffman
    oakland, ca

On 1/22/2016 9:15 AM, Martha Wild via Callers wrote:
And I don’t ban those words from my conversation if they are appropriate and in context. My daughter raises chickens. We talk about the cocks and the hens. In the lab the carboys have stopcocks on them. I have friends called Dick and I use their right name. Context is important, though if I were in the presence of an English language learner I might be careful assuming my listeners were not as familiar with different words. But that is also context.
Martha

On Jan 22, 2016, at 9:04 AM, Ron Blechner <contra...@gmail.com <mailto:contra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

It also means that I refrain from the following word uses:

"Gay" meaning happy.
"Cock" meaning rooster.
"Pussy" meaning cat.
"Douche" meaning to shower.

This, as an aside, was a funny email to write. Apologies for any offended, but I use slang/swear words to make a serious point, and we're all mature here. I hope.

Ron

On Jan 22, 2016 12:01 PM, "Ron Blechner" <contra...@gmail.com <mailto:contra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

    Sargon,

    You and I don't get to decide what millions of people think a
    word means. it's the nature of language. Logic often has no
    bearing on it.

    In the same way "negro" is derived from Latin for "black", and
    aptly may describe a color, it's still inappropriate and
    offensive in most human contexts nowadays.

    When a word stereotypes a group of people, the only ones who get
    to decide the proper use of that word is... that group of people.

    ...

    As for contra communities, until there's more groundswell of
    support for changing "gypsy", it's an uphill battle. I think
    perhaps the smart thing for those of us concerned with not using
    the word is to educate. At the same time, I fully respect callers
    choosing to use their own replacements.

    Ron Blechner

    On Jan 22, 2016 11:50 AM, <sargo...@gmail.com
    <mailto:sargo...@gmail.com>> wrote:

        I disagree. If it is fair to condemn a word despite
        widespread ignorance of its racist etymology (such as the
        very real problem with the verb "gyp"), then the inverse must
        be true: it is fair to exonerate a word despite widespread
        ignorance of its non-racist etymology (e.g., niggardly). That
        a word falsely gets attributed to a category in which it
        doesn't belong is irrelevant. If two separate
        meanings/derivations converge to an identically spelled
        modern word, I don't believe the innocent word (when used in
        its original context) deserves to be written off. Let us
        truly abide by what you claim to support: its current use
        *is* relevant.


        On Jan 21, 2016, at 13:25, Ron Blechner via Callers
        <callers@lists.sharedweight.net
        <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:

        Martha,

        Regardless of whether it was derived from Welsh hundreds of
        years ago, would you say more than 0.1% of dancers know
        that? Or, do you think 99.9%+ of dancers associate "gypsy"
        the dance move with the slang for wandering people?

        Regardless of its origin, its current use is relevant.

        Ron

        On Jan 21, 2016 12:15 PM, "Martha Wild via Callers"
        <callers@lists.sharedweight.net
        <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:

            As mentioned, there are many words we use that are even
            considered impolite but only depending on context. The
            nickname for Richard, for example. Lots of men proudly
            use that as their name, but it’s also a really offensive
            term. The name Randy has other contexts, yet we use it
            without any problem in the context of someone with that
            as their name. (Note the use of the plural for the
            generic singular pronoun, which I’ve done for years,
            unhappy with he/him for that term and that just sort of
            started happening). If our word actually came down from
            Welsh, and has no relationship to the Romani whatsoever,
            then it would seem even more reason to recognize that it
            is context dependent and completely divorced from the
            pejorative use of the unfortunately similar word in
            other countries.
            Martha

            On Jan 21, 2016, at 5:56 AM, Janet Bertog via Callers
            <callers@lists.sharedweight.net
            <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:

            I have contacted Carol and have begun a discussion.  I
            still have several unanswered questions but one thing I
            did learn is that the Romani have claimed the word and
            deemed it offensive and feel it should not be used, in
            any context, in any language.  More about why she
            herself uses the word later. One thing I asked her was
            about her insistence on the use of a capital G.  To me,
            this would indicate that Gypsy would refer to the
            ethnicity, while gypsy would have a possibly completely
            different meaning.

            We know that gipsy/gip was being used in country dances
            at least in 1909 when Cecil Sharp wrote them down.  Two
            of the three dances in the 1909 book originated in the
            1500s, one ECD and one Morris Dance from Scotland.  We
            do not know if they originally used the terms gip/gipsy
            in the 1500s, but we do know that gip, at least, has
            another meaning in Welsh (a celtic language) - gaze or
            glance.

            So, my conversation with Carol is ongoing, and
            unresolved. But if you feel that a group can claim a
            word and then claim that it is a slur, there are a lot
            of other words you should stop using as well.

            Janet

            On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 3:00 AM, Erik Hoffman via
            Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net
            <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:

                What's in a word? As this list points out, it gets
                confusing.

                Like Martha, I stopped using "Ladies," and "Gents,"
                or "Gentlemen," because they are words steeped in
                class-ism. And after years of being told we live in
                a classless society, the lie of that became clear.

                But, more recently I was approached by a man who
                felt "Ladies," and "Gents" were roles anyone could
                play whereas "Men" and "Women" really did refer to
                what was between our legs, and made it more
                uncomfortable to switch roles. Also, even though we
                live in a severely class society, the words
                "Ladies" and "Gents" don't seem to carry that
                weight any more.

                Then again, in Berkeley we've switched to "gender
                free," and use "Ravens" and "Larks" now.

                This is all to say, those who come to the dance
                have many differing associations with words. And
                sometimes it is important that we listen.

                Take "He" and "She." We all know that "He" has been
                the generic pronoun where "She" refers only to
                women. Since we live in a society dominated by the
                patriarchal Christian religion, it's clear that
                using "He" and "Him" generically supports this
                concept. Many of us, in the sixties and seventies
                counteracted this male dominance by using "She" and
                "Her" as the generic pronoun. It was startling how
                different it feels to switch to those. There are
                now corners pushing to just use "They" and "Them"
                for everyone, like we use "you" for both plural and
                singular. Maybe it will take hold...

                But all this is to say, these little words do have
                an affect on how we think about things.

                So now we are thinking about "gypsy." Or, better
                with capitalization, "Gypsy." Is it derogatory?  To
                some, not all. Is that reason enough to change?
                Perhaps for some. I've started using "Right
                Shoulder Turn," and "Left Shoulder Turn." It
                doesn't slide off the tongue, an isn't as colorful,
                but it is more descriptive. At Contra Carnivale,
                Susan Michaels said someone had come up with
                "Roma-around," or "Romaround.."

                So we're all dealing with it, and considering this as:

                Some of us are attached to our words, and don't
                want to loose it. Some of us are vociferous about
                keeping it. And some of us are searching for a
                substitute that might work better. Seems about right.

                Mostly, I want to suggest, as we struggle with
                this, consider how our language and word choice
                does affect others, whether we mean it to or not.
                As callers, we are in the public eye--granted a
                small pond of the public--but our words do go out
                there and cause others to think, too.

                What's in a word? A lot.

                ~erik hoffman
                    oakland, ca

                _______________________________________________
                Callers mailing list
                Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
                <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
                
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net


            _______________________________________________
            Callers mailing list
            Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
            <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
            http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net


            _______________________________________________
            Callers mailing list
            Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
            <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
            http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

        _______________________________________________
        Callers mailing list
        Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
        <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
        http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net




_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Reply via email to