I agree. I still believe that women, men, man stems from human not a
gender specific word, though.
Bertina Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 16 Mar 1995, Brian A. Luke wrote:
>
> >
> > I think you're putting the horse before the cart, here, and most linguists
> > would agree. What comes first -- the experience of fire or the word we
> > create for it? I can experience and conceptualize many things for which I
> > lack words. Culture ultimately shapes language, not the reverse (in my
>
> Isn't it more dialectical, with influences both ways? So that the
> absence of certain words/concepts in a culture (e.g., the absence of
> a word to refer to females that does not define them purely in
> relation to males) can make it much more difficult to see certain
> possibilities (such as women's liberation).
>
>
>
> >
> > >Language is very powerful. I suggest that you read '1984' by >george orwell
> >
> > Yes, language is very powerful. I read Orwell many years ago -- you might
> > want to take a look at Wittgenstein.
>
> I read Wittgenstein a while ago, and I think he would agree that our
> linguistic/conceptual structure shapes our reality, not vice versa.
> So struggle over language IS political struggle. (Obviously language
> is not the ONLY arena for political struggle.)
>
>
> The trouble with using Orwell in your
> > argument, is that by changing the language, Big Brother did not truly alter
> > the fundamental beliefs, desires and pursuits of free thought among his
> > oppressed subjects. They still disobeyed.
>
> Yes, but the disobedience, or revolutionary impulse, is so much
> more disorganized, ineffective, mischanneled, etc., when we have no
> vocabulary for revolution. "Anarchy" is the first example that comes
> to my mind. People in the US right now really cannot conceive of the
> possibility of living without governmental repression (cops, prisons,
> military), because the mass media have successfully gotten "anarchy"
> to connote violence and chaos. Because of this linguistic
> manipulation, we now live in a culture where opposition to street
> crime simply MEANS building more prisons and hiring more cops. We
> cannot see the possibility of policing our own neighborhoods.
> There's no word for such a thing, and there are no examples of it,
> and these two facts are dialectically linked.
>
> Mary Daly has done a lot to further women's liberation by developing
> new words, reclaiming appropriated concepts, etc., do you agree?
>
> Brian
>
>
>
>
>
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 17 15:23:35 MST 1995
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 15:22:49 MST
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: La Sierra Foundation of San Luis
To the ECOFEM Moderator:
Please approve the following posting:
Thank you - Devon Pena (still lurking)
TO: Colleagues Interested in Environmental Justice (as a
practice and not just a theory)
FROM: Devon Pena, Chair- Advisory Board, La Sierra Foundation
of San Luis
DATE: March 16, 1995
SUBJ: Announcing a National Search for Executive Director and
Assistant Director of La Sierra Foundation of San Luis
Dear Friends:
Enclosed are job descriptions for two positions. Please circulate
these as widely as possible.
La Sierra Foundation of San Luis is a community-based organization
in San Luis, Colorado that is leading a land rights struggle to
restore the commons to the Chicanos heirs of a 19th century Mexican
land grant (Sangre de Cristo land grant). This struggle is of
enormous historical and political significance as it is part of the
movement for environmental and economic justice.
At the heart of the Foundation's organizing campaign is a national
fund-raising effort to assist the community in establishing a
community land trust dedicated to the protection of both biological
and cultural diversity. The campaign is an effort to restore
communal ownership and self-management of a 77,000 acre commons
known as "la sierra" (or Mountain Tract). This land, privately
owned since an enclosure in 1960, includes the only privately owned
14,000 foot mountain in North America and eight other peaks over
13,000 feet in elevation. The Culebra Mountain Tract includes
almost every major life zone in North America (from alpine tundra
at elevations above 12,000 feet to Upper Sonoran cold desert below
8,500 feet). The endangered Mexican spotted-owl (Strix
occidentalis) and the rare and threatened Colorado coutthroat trout
are among the unique species in this watershed ecosystem.
But the mountain watershed also supports the oldest agricultural
communities in Colorado. These Chicano communities have the oldest
water rights in the state and are renowned for their sustainable
agroecological practices. For example, the farms of this bioregion
rely on an irrigation tradition with roots in North Africa known as
the acequia (gravity-ditch system). The term acequia actually has
roots in the Arabic term, as-Saquiya (which means the "water
bearer" or "water carrier"). The acequia irrigation system
increases biological diversity because the earthen ditch networks
encourage the formation of wetlands and other plant communities
that constitute biological corridors and habitat.
There are serious threats to the integrity of the watershed
(primarily the threat of timbering or mining operations). The
processes that destroy wildlife habitat (deforestation for
example), would also destroy the irrigation systems and the
sustainable farms they make possible.
We welcome applications for the two positions described below. We
are especially interested in Chicana/Latina applicants and we are
also interested in someone who has some background in the private,
non-profit sector or perhaps someone with experience as a corporate
CEO or manager. If you are interested in these positions but would
like more information, please contact:
Dr. Devon Pena
Chair, Advisory Board, La Sierra Foundation of San Luis
at
Department of Sociology
Colorado College
14 East Cache La Poudre
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
719-389-6642
719-389-6586 (fax)
e-Mail address: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
I will be happy to send additional, background information (only to
serious potential applicants).
La Sierra Foundation of San Luis is a private, non-profit
corporation supported by funding from the Rural Poverty Programs at
the Ford Foundation.
*****************************************************************
JOB DESCRIPTIONS
Executive Director
Chief administrative officer of the foundation who will be
responsible for implementing the policies of the LSF Board of
Directors.
Primary Responsibilities
1. fund raising for acquisition;
2. leadership development and community organizing;
3. planning and research oversight;
4. liaison with local community government agencies,
foundations,academic and scientific groups, and the press;
5. office management;
6. coordination of different LSF departments (community outreach
and education, research, publications, policy development, and
management);
7. preparation of monthly reports on the progress of the
foundation's efforts, including fund raising, leadership
development, etc.;
Qualifications
1. must be familiar with local community constituencies and
organizations;
2. must be knowledgeable of the history and culture of the region
and the political and economic conditions affecting the community;
3. must be computer literate: ability to work with a variety of
computing software (spreadsheets, word processing, data base
management, and internet)
4. must have experience in office management,program development,
administration, and staff supervision;
5. must be willing and able to delegate responsibility to others
and to work cooperatively and respectfully with board directors,
staff, and community;
6. must have fund-raising skills and grant-writing experience and
ability;
7. must have ability to communicate effectively in public;
8. B.A. required
9. Bi-lingual ( Spanish and English reading, writing and speaking
abilities preferred).
AA/EEO - women and people of color
particularly encouraged to apply.
Administrative Assistant
Daily office supervisor.
Primary Responsibilities
1. works with executive director to promote direct community
participation in the foundation;
2. fund raising (grant writing), door to door outreach, and
organizing community meetings;
3. publications and public relations (coordination,supervision, and
preparation of monthly reports on organizing activities);
4. coordination, identification, supervision, and recruitment of
volunteers;
5. provide direct leadership training for the community;
6. provides support for research activities and prepares public
education materials;
7. makes presentations to foundations, government agencies, and
other community organizations as instructed by executive director;
8. responsibility for daily office bookkeeping ( purchase order,
requisitions, etc.).
Qualifications
1. must be familiar with local community constituencies and
organizations;
2. must be knowledgeable of the history and culture of the region
and the political and economic conditions affecting the community;
3. must be computer literate: ability to work with a variety of
computing software ( spreadsheets, word processing, data base
management, and internet);
4. must have experience in office management, program development,
administration, and staff supervision;
5. must be willing and able to delegate responsibility to others
and to work cooperatively and respectfully with the board of
directors, staff, and community;
6. must have fund-raising skills and grant-writing experience and
ability;
7. must have ability to communicate effectively in public;
8. B.A. preferred or demonstrated experience,
9. Bi-lingual (Spanish-English reading, writing, and speaking
abilities preferred).
AA/EEO - women and people of color particularly encouraged to apply
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 17 18:57:08 MST 1995
(8.6.10/IDA-1.6 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 11:56:48 +1000
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 11:54:47 +1000
id sma013415; Sat Mar 18 11:54:40 1995
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 11:56:39 +1000
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 95 11:57:41 +1000
From: "David Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Womyn/women
X-Incognito-Sn: 553
X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.74 ENCRYPTED=NO
On Fri, 17 Mar 1995, Faith Freewoman wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 1956, Kylie Matthews wrote:
>
> > [Women] is derived from the word men because if men were derived from
> > women then the generic would then have to be women and not men.
>
> Well, that's what Webster's tells us, and that's the assumption behind
> people who are purported to be experts in the English language.
>
> But, my response is to go ahead thinking that "men" is derived from women
> and that someone just slipped up years ago;
The origin of the word women is an acronym. Its comes from the phrase
'wife of man'. Although this is not that common knowledge it still defines
wymn in terms of men. Just by changing the spelling to remove the
reference to man from the word would have an effect if someone saw
the word written.
I have thought about it a bit and there are only three words in the language
I know of which refer to women without reference to man. They are
wife, girl and lady. Each of these words has been devalued in some
ways. Wife, well. How often do you hear the phrase 'man and wife'. It
implicitly defines the fact that the person has a man attached to them and
it automaticly puts them in a lower position in a persons mind because
of how it is socialy recognised. Girl, well this only refers to younger
women and is definately an insult to call somone older this. Lady has
been devalued by the Victorian era. A lady is someone who lives in
glass castles and is definately not allowed to throw stones.
Another interesting point about the origin of the word is that man did used
to be a generic a long time ago. There was a seperate word for
man (wer) and a seperare word for women (wif). The only reference
of wer left is in werwolf, and well wif has been devalued to mean 'wife'.
(I am not trying to say there is anything wrong with being a wife or
whatever, i am purely refering to the social meaning of the word).
The language does need to be changed to help fix up the problems.
Psycological studies were done on young children, they were asked
in cases where man was used as a generic (like in fireman, postman etc)
what they thought of. They all thought of men. This excludes women
from these jobs before they start as everyone thinks of the person
as being a man. It is very hard to imagine a women being a fire fighter
if you always assume fire fighters are men....
To see the level of problems which our society has in reference to
sexism is quite easy. There are interactive games out there called
MUDs. Logging into one as a female and trying to play for a while
can be quite enlightening. Then try logging in as a male. Because
muds are anonymous, no one really knows who you are, people
think they can get away with a lot more without any effect on them.
They do and say things they probably only think of saying in
public. It really is quite worrying.
Wombles suffering in the light of the day,
David.How do you spell Wymn?
Jean Freer
Since the early 1970s women have been re-
shaping society to include a place for ourselves
within it. Much of this change has been
through language. The word 'woman',
meaning wife of man and referring to that
portion of the species supposedly formed from
Adam's rib, has especially been a focus for
attention. Preferring 'woman' absolutely to
'lady', many differently spelled variations have
arisen. It was Margaret Storey, who, over
several years, evolved the form 'wymn'. The
spellings I use reflect and address what I
perceive to be particular states of
consciousness and attitudes about our realities.
For example, as I understand womben, they
adopt a fertility-oriented definition of
themselves and relate to the world through
their wombs whereas wimmin and wimin
refuse to prioritise childbearing and are
strongly aware of the political oppression of
wymn by sexism in patriarchy. A womon-
loving womon is powerful and centred herself
and many womyn are consciously tuning in to
our magical energies and the need to act as
healers. Women share their lives with men and
seek equality and a balancing of the feminine
and the masculine. For me all these different
spellings and others yet to be created are like
the names of different tribes or clans. As
wymn become more autonomous we being to
differentiate and to take on more distinct
aspects and characteristics. The varieties of
spelling mirror the richness of wymn's culture
that is now emerging as we give birth to
ourselves in this time of universal
transformation.
[DDT] Pink fish forever.
(Here is an interesting article. It is the forward to the book 'A Feminist Tarot'
by Jean Freer)
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 17 19:03:48 MST 1995
(8.6.10/IDA-1.6 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:03:49 +1000
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:01:47 +1000
id sma013430; Sat Mar 18 12:01:44 1995
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:03:49 +1000
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 95 12:04:51 +1000
From: "David Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The Wo-Man Thing
X-Incognito-Sn: 553
X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.74 ENCRYPTED=NO
> I agree. I still believe that women, men, man stems from human not a
> gender specific word, though.
As I previously mentioned woman comes from 'wife of man'. But this
itself is mostly irrelevant. The relevant thing is how the word is
viewed by society. Not the original meaning, after all, not many
people know the original meaning or origin of 99% of the words
in our current language.
Because woman has the word 'man' contained in it, it looks far more
like women is an addition to man. A specialisation or a bit tacked on
and man is the generic thingy. The same applies to male and female
(though I don't know the origin of the word female). Just by
changing the spelling to wymn you can reduce this perception of
people as now, the word man does not occur in the word.
Blue in a red cloudy sky,
David.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 17 19:05:04 MST 1995
(8.6.10/IDA-1.6 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:04:50 +1000
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:02:47 +1000
id sma013435; Sat Mar 18 12:02:06 1995
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:04:10 +1000
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 95 12:04:55 +1000
From: "David Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: FW: A (breif?) hiatus
X-Incognito-Sn: 553
X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.74 ENCRYPTED=NO
Whoops. I originaly sent this to the discworld MUD mailing list. Oh well,
we enlighted a few more people every day. :)
> On Thu, 16 Mar 1995, Jonathan M Poppele wrote:
> >I find the current climate of harsh language, personal
> > slights and disrespect for others views both distasteful and harmful to
> > our common objectives. I feel that this list has some soul searching
> > ahead of it and, should I not return in a weeks time, I wish all of you the
> > best.
> I tend to agree with Jon. I have not said anything on the list, because
> I simply have not had the time for much list correspondence of any type.
I agree that personal slights etc are counterproductive. However I would
like to make the point that there have actually been very few of these on
the list. Most people have explained their view without resorting to
abuse. This list is far more well behaved than basicly any other I
have been on.
> PS I would be interested in hearing how many UNSUBSCRIBE messages have
> been received lately. There have been at least two mistakenly sent to
> the list as a whole in the past few weeks. Jon sent his message, which
> makes at least 1 more thinking about signing off. Is this an unusually
> large number and have there been a lot of other UNSUBS lately? How about
> it list managers? Got any (shudder, choke) stats on this?
Most people unsubscribe from mailing lists, not because the conversation
suddenly offends them, but because the level of traffic on the list becomes
too high for them. As this list has quite recently suddenly started generating
a lot of traffic, we are bound to get a number of unsubscriptions.
People seem to like the idea of being on a mailing list, they just don't like
receiveing mail from it :) I have seen this trend happen on several lists
(I have also done this myself... :)
Wombles stuck in a pink void,
David.
===========================================================
Trace Info: Sydney1,Perth1
Certified: No Confirmation Requested
Reply To: smtp@MIS@Stan-NSW[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Priority : Normal
Message Type: Normal
Message ID: ,9Z7+TnXOjc
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 17 19:06:53 MST 1995
(8.6.10/IDA-1.6 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:06:48 +1000
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:04:47 +1000
id sma013445; Sat Mar 18 12:04:43 1995
(5.67b/IDA-1.5 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>); Sat, 18 Mar 1995 12:06:47 +1000
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 95 12:07:40 +1000
From: "David Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Womyn/women
X-Incognito-Sn: 553
X-Incognito-Format: VERSION=1.74 ENCRYPTED=NO
> But, my response is to go ahead thinking that "men" is derived from women
> and that someone just slipped up years ago; all we need to do is point
> out the fact often enough, and pretty soon the words will begin to
> reflect the biological facts: everyone starts as a woman, and some just
> evolve differently to provide us starters with mirrors, and themselves
> with the experience of not being the dominant species.
In language, usualy you have a root word which is smaller than the others
and the other words are derived from that. Since this is a general rule
in the english language, people will naturaly apply this to the words
woman and man. It looks far more like women is derived from
man than the other way around.
I think this use of a small root word goes back to latin?
Lost in a sky full of bats,
David.
[DDT] Pink fish forever.
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 17 19:49:30 MST 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 21:49:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: David Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FW: A (breif?) hiatus
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, 17 Mar 1995, David Bennett wrote:
Jayne Docherty wrote:
> > PS I would be interested in hearing how many UNSUBSCRIBE messages have
> > been received lately. There have been at least two mistakenly sent to
> > the list as a whole in the past few weeks. Jon sent his message, which
> > makes at least 1 more thinking about signing off. Is this an unusually
> > large number and have there been a lot of other UNSUBS lately? How about
> > it list managers? Got any (shudder, choke) stats on this?
>
> Most people unsubscribe from mailing lists, not because the conversation
> suddenly offends them, but because the level of traffic on the list becomes
> too high for them. As this list has quite recently suddenly started generating
> a lot of traffic, we are bound to get a number of unsubscriptions.
An EXCELLENT reminder that a statistically significant increase in
unsubcription requests tells us nothing about the motivation for the
behavior! I knew I was justified in my suspicion of stats!
Jayne
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Mar 17 20:03:02 MST 1995
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 22:02:49 -0500 (EST)
From: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: David Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Womyn/women
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, 17 Mar 1995, David Bennett wrote:
> I have thought about it a bit and there are only three words in the language
> I know of which refer to women without reference to man. They are
> wife, girl and lady.
IF I understand semantic field theory (and that IS a BIG if, since I just
started struggling with it), none of these words make reference to women
without making reference to men. Semantic field theory has to do with
the fact that words take their meaning (not their dictionary definition)
from their relationship to other words in a common set. In natural
language, we carry this set in our heads and we understand single words
in relation to these "stored" semantic fields. Thus, wife, girl and lady
may not contain any reference to man in the word itself, but we
understand their meaning in relation to a whole semantic field of
"humans".
Wife is the most obvious example of this since the dominant social
meaning of wife is -- a woman married to a man. Girl is a little less
clearly referencing man -- although it does reference boy. A girl being
a non-adult female and understood as "other than" a non-adult male. Lady
also carries lots of baggage, since it is often used to reference a woman
of a particular standing in society and that standing is usually derived
either from her relationship to a man of high standing or in relation to
her "purity". As in, "a lady does not dress provocatively" or "a lady
does not call a gentleman, but waits for him to call."
Jayne
