"Dick" is a preferred name of your friend. "Gypsy" is a slur to the Roma.
Do you get the difference? On Jan 22, 2016 12:15 PM, "Martha Wild via Callers" < [email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> 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, <[email protected]> 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 < >>> [email protected]> 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" < >>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>> [email protected]> 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 < >>>> [email protected]> 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 >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>> >>> > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >
