Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!apple!hercules!sparkyfs!usasoc.soc.mil!aero!blake.u.washington.edu From: twain@blake.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin) Newsgroups: soc.feminism Subject: Re: Girls, girls, girls Message-ID: <7742@milton.u.washington.edu> Date: 18 Sep 90 19:55:26 GMT References: <9009122207.AA10780@houston.cs.columbia.edu> <10254@goofy.Apple.COM> Sender: nadel@aerospace.aero.org Lines: 226 Approved: nadel@aerospace.aero.org Status: R [I've edited out most of the included text again. I don't think this destroys the meaning of it and it really does make things easier to read. -MHN] In article <10254@goofy.Apple.COM> bdelan@apple.COM (Brian Delaney) writes: >In article <9009122207.AA10780@houston.cs.columbia.edu> >travis@houston.cs.columbia.edu (Travis Lee Winfrey) writes: >> In any case,the use of words like "girl" or "women" signals an attitude of >> respect or the lack of one. You entirely miss the point by claiming that >> they are all words describing the same concept, when _every_ word is rich >> with connotations and secondary meanings. > >Absolutely true, Travis. The problem is, we don't all agree on what >those exact secondary meanings are. > >So, what do we do when we have two people talking to one another; one >of whom thinks that "girls" is friendly, while the other thinks it is >disrespectful? One poster reasonably suggested that we should call a >person whatever they prefer. There are problems with this, chiefly >concerned with figuring out what default to use untill you get to know >them better, but this can be ignored for our purposes here. > I would suggest that everyone err on the side of formality. If someone dislikes a courtesy title like "Mister," he's free to say so, and people do. "Oh, that sounds so stuffy; please call me Ed." Is it possible that anyone in this country is not aware that most adult women prefer being referred to as women rather than girls? [All right; it's possible. But what we have going on here on the net is an argument about whether those who know this need to respect that preference.] If you have a female friend who in your presence says, "Oh, I think that's the stupidest thing in the world; *I* certainly don't mind being called a girl. In fact, I *prefer* it. It makes me feel tiny and cute and helpless." --then by all means, feel free to call her a girl. But unlessyou know otherwise, call an adult women a woman. What's the problem with that? I am introduced to someone as Barbara Hlavin. If the person then addresses a remark to me prefaced with something like, "You know, Barb..." I immediately say, in a friendly tone, "I prefer being called Barbara." Why should this embarrass anyone, make anyone uncomfortable, or make anyone feel I was being disrespectful or using "a power sub-text" telling the other person how s/he is allowed to talk? I think you'd have to be pathologically touchy to resent someone telling you what her name is! If someone deliberately ignores my request, I consider THAT impolite. I use a formality default unless and until someone tells me otherwise. And when I am introduced to someone I ask them how they prefer to be addressed. "Barbara, this is Katherine Hepburn." Me: "How do you do? May I call you Katherine, or would you prefer Ms. Hepburn?" Or -- since we're dealing with fantasy here: "Barbara, this is Robert Redford." Me: "How do you do? May I call you sweetheart?" And I disagree with you Brian, when you say "Words are not dynamite." We're not dealing with a rational world, here. Words are often used as weapons, to purposely hurt, and very effectively. That's the power behind verbal child abuse. Keep telling a child -- an adult, for that matter -- that she's dumb and stupid and ugly and worthless, and she will begin to believe she's dumb and stupid and ugly and worthless. Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will break your heart. And your spirit. What about "Them's fighting words!" When a Southern racist says to an adult African-American man, "Hey, BOY!" surely you don't believe he doesn't intend to be offensive? The racist is demonstrating contempt for the man standing in front of him; he means to do so, and he means the man to know it. Ummm, I use the term "southern racist" here because I don't really hear that particular racial slur used in the north. I am not meaning to suggest that all Southerners are racist, nor that there are no Northern racists. OK? The use of names is indeed powerful. My name is a public form of my private identity. I have the right to determine how it will be used. If I ask you to call me Ms. Hlavin, you have the responsibility to respect my request. If you have a Ph.D. and say to me, "Actually, I prefer to use my professional title socially; I am Dr. Delaney." -- why should I have a problem with that? I think you're right: this is not especially a sexist issue. It is a matter of etiquette, of manners. It is only polite to call people what they prefer to be called. If you don't know and can't find out, why not do as I suggested earlier, and err on the side of formality? If someone is insulted because you are polite, I give up; they're not worth bothering yourself about. Some people are just obnoxiously unreasonable. Forget 'em. Americans are a casual and friendly people. We tend to immediately assume intimacy (some would say pseudo-intimacy), and some people find this intrusive. If I find a form of address offensive, I correct the person. If that person is offended in turn by being told by what name I prefer being addressed, s/he owns the problem. Not everyone likes your dog, either. Respect *does* mean deference; at least that's one of the dictionary definitions: "to feel or show deferential regard for." As for deference itself ("courteous respect; submission or courteous yielding to the opinion, wishes, or judgment of another"), what's wrong with it? I suspect you're focussing on the issue of submission, as in craven, boot-licking kowtowing. but the emphasis, in terms of acceding to people's wishes as to what they want to be called is one of courtesy. --Barbara P.S. Oh, and please *do* call me Grand Omnipotent Poohbah! :-) -- Barbara Hlavin Reason, an ignis fatuus of the mind, twain@blake.acs.washington.edu Which leaves the light of nature, U Washington AI-10/Seattle 98195 Sense, behind. -John Wilmot