T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
724.1 | It all depends on..... | ANT::MPCMAIL | | Thu Mar 30 1989 14:48 | 11 |
| Boy meaning male child.
woman boss speaking Hey Boy fetch me...?
Speaking realistically.. the word FETCH reminds me of the dog ROVER,
I think if someone said could you pleasse get this for me, or
Do you mind geting me this, I'd be more apt to respond positively.
It all depends on how the person phrases a question or a want that
helps me form a decision and how I'll react to their request.
Lisa
|
724.2 | | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Now you're in Heaven.... | Thu Mar 30 1989 15:36 | 39 |
|
> It all depends on how the person phrases a question or a want that
> helps me form a decision and how I'll react to their request.
.1 I think you've hit my feelings on the subject right on the
head! It is the feeling that is conveyed when the sentence
is spoken that annoys me. Take the following two examples:
I was NOT offended in the least this morning in a meeting
when someone said, "Let's listen to what this girl has to
say." (actually to me that implied respect for my opinion.)
But I was offended in the note from this conference today that
said "Perhaps the younger ones in here still haven't found
that out." (implying to me that since I am younger than the
author, and I have a differing opinion than the author, then
I because of my age, I really haven't experienced enough to
really know what's going on and how I should act.)
Now, the term "girl" did not in the least offend me, nor does
the term "younger ones". The point I am trying to make is
that the interpretion of the sentence is what offends me...I
could really care less what words are used.
I also expect someone that *is* offended by word usage, to take
me aside and say "hey, could you call me <insert word here>
from now on?" I will gladly comply! (But if they flame at
me and blow up about it the first time I use it, they're
probably digging their own grave in my book.) As I am not
offended by word usage, I rarely tailor what I say around
others unless I know what I say offends them.
IMHO, naturally...
kath
|
724.3 | I Am No Longer A Girl-Unfortunately | USEM::DONOVAN | | Thu Mar 30 1989 16:13 | 8 |
| I am a woman. I do not get insulted if I am referred to as a lady.
I hate when store clerks call me "Ma'am". My one year old (as of
yesterday) daughter is a girl. I think it's just as silly to call
a woman a girl as it is to call a man a boy. Tasteless and inaprop-
riate.
Kate-a woman (at least I was last time I checked)
|
724.4 | Is this the right room? | SUPER::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Thu Mar 30 1989 16:50 | 25 |
|
[The separate note *is* the right way to go. Thanks
to Guy for reminding us...and to Gene for doing it.]
I would no more call a man...young, old,
middle...whatever..."boy" than I would spit in his
face. [unless provoked....grin] I think it would
be demeaning to do so. And has historically been
used to infer less status [Thanks Mallett....I'm
gonna save that one to quote....]
Why is it so difficult for *some* [not all] men to
understand many [again not all] women's feeling on
this? If nothing else, it makes me wary of what will
follow...defensive posture struck so-to-speak. It
*costs* so very little to be sensitive to this and
avoid it.
At the same time, I must buy-in to the theory that
the delivery and setting have a whole lot to do with
how I am going to react. Socially! I cannot accept
this in the workplace even when well-intentioned,
with raised eyebrows or raised anything....[grin]
Melinda
|
724.5 | | ACESMK::CHELSEA | Mostly harmless. | Thu Mar 30 1989 17:22 | 24 |
| Sometime within the last six months or so, I finally reached the
point of occasionally feeling like a "grown-up." The feeling is
based, I think, on my degree of independence and responsibility.
I reached a point where I was more responsible *for* something than
responsible *to* someone.
Even though I've been feeling young for a long time (and still do,
mostly), I can't think of myself as a "girl." You can use the word
"girl" in reference to some women, such as store clerks, and I might
not really notice. However, if you use the word "girl" in reference
to me, I'm going to be confused for a moment because that's not the
picture I have of myself. I don't exactly think of myself as "woman"
either (perhaps "young woman" is the most accurate), but that's
certainly closer than "girl."
When I'm dealing with people in a non-professional capacity and
they're older than me (old enough to be graying), I'm more willing
to accept a "girl" or "dear." I look young and I sound much younger
over the phone. (I get "dear"ed most often on the phone.) These
people are at least old enough to be my parents, so it's not so
surprising to be treated more like a child. If the same words come
from someone closer to my own age, they strike a discordant note.
If the same words come from someone I'm dealing with in a professional
capacity, they are very surprising.
|
724.6 | Hey BOY, bring that Dead Horse over here, I gotta beat it some more.... | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Thu Mar 30 1989 22:56 | 18 |
| IMO the word "girl" is just a word used to refer to the sex of a
person. I could be just laziness (Woman has two sylables :-) )
or it could be just my outlook on life. I feel that everyone is
still a kid at heart. So all men are boys and all women are girls.
I do however recognize that the reverse isn't true. All boys are
Men and All girls are women is definately not true. I just have
a very carefree attitude about life and I find it tough to get all
worked up over being called a boy (or even a girl.). ***IMO***
they are just words. I will try to be careful around people that
it bothers.
Bill
(If you think about it "WOMAN" cold be condesending also..
"Get out of here WOMAN." or "Hey WOMAN, Fetch me a beer!"
Pretty condesending huh?!?)
|
724.7 | Boys will be boys... but "men" prefer "women"... | CASV02::SALOIS | Find out something only dead men know | Thu Mar 30 1989 23:37 | 34 |
|
In my "not-so-humble" opinion, this is not "beating a dead horse".
"(If you think about it "WOMAN" cold be condesending also..
"Get out of here WOMAN." or "Hey WOMAN, Fetch me a beer!"
Pretty condesending huh?!?)"
I would certainly agree, but only because of the statement as a
whole.
Question...? The following statements...
Ask the girls to come here.
Ask the women to come here.
Neither sentence could be construed as condescending. Yet, the
word woman connotes a certain degree of maturity. Why try to
denigrate the level of maturity a woman has reached, by referring
to her as girl? Would someone also refer to an 8 year old female
as a "woman"?? I hardly would think so. So, conversely, it would
seem to me, a person who refers to a female of, say 20+ years, as
"girl", is either ignorant of basic physiology, or as someone else
wrote, too lazy to bother. Yet, I guess if a person is a big enough
boy/girl to "beat a dead horse", he/she can't be all that lazy. Which,
I guess, just leaves one other reason.
(tongue-in-cheek)
FWIW - I've never had a humble opinion in my life! 8*)
Gene~
|
724.8 | ramblings | WMOIS::B_REINKE | If you are a dreamer, come in.. | Fri Mar 31 1989 00:09 | 100 |
| I've been to a number of work shops on valuing differences,
and other types of classes on the DEC of the future.
I've seen two videos on this and have also had this presented
by workshop leaders...
this is my brief summary of the role of words in the work place
how many of you remember 'transactional anaylsis' this was where
people looked at what role each person was playing in any transaction..
in general the transactions are
adult<-------->adult
\ /
\/
/\
/ \
parent </--- \>parent
\ /
\ /
child </---\>child
This is hard to do in notes but the point is that we interact at
all levels both back and forth and up and down..
now let us imagine the same diagram but on the left you have
female terms and on the right you have male.
This very clearly shows that between girls and girls or boys
and girls of what ever age...that this is a relationship between
equals. But between adults (male) and girls (children) this
is not a relationship between equals. In a business relatinship
it should be adult/adult. One thing I have seen in the business
world is that the women who allow the sr men to call them 'girls'
get stuck in dead end situations. They get lots of praise, and
get called on to help out with difficult stuff (I have to avoid
this on the other end - being in my 40s I get the 'mother' trip)
but, guess what, they don't get promotions...they get to do well
in their niche and the 'guys' who are 'men' get promotions.
I'd suggest reading 'Games your mother never taught you'.
Bonnie
p.s. In general, what do you call, in the work environment,
a person with two X chromosomes, who is
1. your sr manager
2. a vice president
3. your immediate superior
4. a team leader
5. an outside expert called in to deal with a problem
in general you would call them a woman...which implies, maturity,
competence, and ability to handel the situation.
I still recall the time a man in my group refered to his female
supervisor, as a girl...
*whew*
and in re Bill, I find your responses very interesting in that
your personal name and notes lead me to believe that you are
fairly recently out of college. My oldest son is now in college
and finds me insufficiently sensitive in re termonology about
gender...
don't know if his college is typical...but I think that eliminating
'girl' from the language as referring to adult women, may well
be as "declasse' or "non 'U'" or 'out of it' or in poor taste,
as calling an African American a colored person or Negro..no one
will bite your head off, but you will identify yourself as a person
who isn't really aware of what people are thinking about and
taling about...or that you are someone who choses to use a word
with negative conotations, for what ever reason.
and I would no more criticise a woman who likes to be called a 'girl'
by men, than many Black/African Americans in the past would criticise
people of color who still liked to be called colored or Negro.
Just
*flame on* Don't decide my degree of maturity by what words
I find personally offensive!
*flame off*
or I will in turn reply that those types of tactics are very
familiar to me...my teenagers do it all the time but the men
and women I am aquainted with don't
Bonnie
|
724.10 | Not really opposing views?! | GEMVAX::ADAMS | | Fri Mar 31 1989 10:08 | 57 |
| Such a strange discussion this is, with everyone seemingly presenting
arguments, but, near as I can tell, everyone agrees on the bottom
line--people should be called by whatever name they prefer. And most
everyone agrees that circumstances and intent make a difference in how
a "label" is received.
We do seem to differ on our approach to the issue, however, and it
strikes me that the difference is mainly due to age. I know age has
recently been mentioned (and not well received) as a factor, but I
think it's a valid point (especially in this case).
In general, the longer we live, the more we learn, experience, and
grow (isn't that part of what's life's about?)--I know more now than
I did 10, 5, 2 years ago (probably even more than I knew yesterday
too); I've had a lot of pleasant and unpleasant experiences that have
broadened and often changed my perception of things; and that's growth
to me.
I'm not saying an older person's opinion is right and a younger
person's wrong (or vice versa) and I'm not saying that the "wisdom"
of age invalidates a youthful view--only that they are two different
perspectives based on differing backgrounds and experiences (true of
any two people, no?).
I remember a recent note (here or in WN maybe) asking how much
discrimination/bias/whatever did you feel growing up. As I recall,
most of the younger noters felt little or none as compared to older
noters. And this leads me to certain conclusions that may help us to
better understand each other.
Younger noters--consider that your older compatriots have experienced
and/or seen a lot more discrimination and inequality and have fought
and worked like hell to get the respect and the position they have
now; and in so doing may have made the way a little easier for you.
(Not to say you won't fight and work like hell too, but you'll do it
over different issues; I think that's called progress.)
Older noters--consider why you fight and work like hell. Isn't
part of it to effect a change, to make things a little better for
those coming behind you? Maybe this youthful attitude (it's only a
word, a label; it's not that important whether you're called woman or
girl, man or boy) is evidence of some success? Isn't that an exciting
thought? It may not be showing up in a way you expected (change rarely
does, it seems), but there it is.
FWIW, my own personal preference ... I_Am_Woman (remember Helen Reddy?
8-)). Somehow I doubt that I_Am_Girl would have made it in the charts.
Part of it is how the words sound (say them aloud). Girl sounds weak
and wimpy to me. Woman sounds strong and independent and self-reliant--
more the kind of person I'd like to be and certainly the kind of person
I'd like to be perceived as. Oops! I guess I'm showing *my* age ...
8-)
Nancy
|
724.11 | Now listen to me, chillun... | GERBIL::IRLBACHER | A middle class bag lady | Fri Mar 31 1989 10:09 | 29 |
| When I was growing up in the ancient days pre-TV and WWII, there
were very specific ways one referred to the female gender.
Woman= female. Someone's female relative [as in: woman, have you
fed the hogs
yet?] *or* That woman is gonna be the death of me.
Girl= again female. She's young, pretty, inexperienced. And this
word *always* was used in reference to a female of African-American
origin even if she were 101 yrs old.
Lady= Generally the speaker's mother, wife, or sister. Someone
respected in the community or the wife, mother, or sister of someone
with enough power and prestige that it was assumed even if the female
in question was a tramp, she was still a "lady".
Gal=a denigrating term when applied to a female of color. A nickname
for my cousin [who still can't figure out why she was called that]
and a term that often was meant in the "good ole boy" way as in
"now that gal is really *something*".
I guess what it comes down to in my mind is what in heck does the
*speaker* have going on in *their* head.
I am not a girl. I am too old, and too jaded for the title. I
am a woman...and I can't stand being called "girl" but am flattered
as all he*l when someone says it nicely.
M
|
724.12 | Chronological Issue ??? | FDCV10::BOTTIGLIO | Some Teardrops Never Dry | Fri Mar 31 1989 11:47 | 9 |
| Boys will be Men - someday
Girls will be Women - someday
The reverse has never happened yet, and the probability of it
is very unlikely unless we learn to reverse time.
Guy B.
|
724.13 | | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Now you're in Heaven.... | Fri Mar 31 1989 11:52 | 26 |
|
.10, Very well said! 8^)
I don't think anyone is arguing the fact that we should
always call someone by whatever name they prefer to be
called. FWIW, I would find it very awkward calling a woman
over about thirty "girl."
I'm 23 right now and it makes no difference to me what you
call me. Will it make any difference when I'm 40? Probably
not. Could it be that maybe the younger generation has
decided that labels really don't matter.
I do think that the the younger generation is becoming very
carefree. While we are very agressive in attaining our
goals, I think that we've just decided that everyone should
be allowed to do/be what they want--and we try to not judge
others for being different than us.
IMHO....
kath
|
724.14 | American Heritage | WMOIS::E_FINKELSEN | w/o stress, life would be empty | Fri Mar 31 1989 13:11 | 26 |
| American Heritage:
BOY: 1. a male child or a youth
2. a word used as a mild exclamation
GIRL: 1. a female child or yound unmarried woman
2. informal: a woman
3. a sweetheart
4. a female servant.
Why not informal: a man, a sweetheart, a male servant?
I personally think in terms of girl more than woman depending on what level of
intimacy I'm at with them. If it is a "girl" friend then I'm more apt to think
girl. If it is just an aquaintance maybe more apt to think woman.
I don't get hung up on the phrase if it is spoken by someone that I don't feel
is chauvinistic. You can tell by the way they say it.
Young woman seems to be the safest for someone in my age group. I feel
comfortable with that no matter who says it. I don't like the term lady that
much because when I was a kid, lady was reserved for women you thought of as
old! Sort of like "That lady down the street chased us again." (she may have
been only 30 for all I know!)
|
724.15 | In all sincerety... | SUPER::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Fri Mar 31 1989 15:49 | 22 |
|
RE: .13
From all of us that were once 23
[I know it *sounds* impossible...but true
none-the-less]
And especially from those of us who are a far cry from
23 who watched our classmates get gunned down on
college campuses ....and waited for friends to come home
from war who never did...and have buried children
and parents and friends....and have sat through long
nights holding strangers who wanted to die...
I am sincerely glad that labels do not mean much
to you. I hope you *never* have the occaision to find
out how important they *can* be.
Melinda
|
724.16 | | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Now you're in Heaven.... | Fri Mar 31 1989 16:27 | 26 |
|
RE: melinda
> And especially from those of us who are a far cry from
> 23 who watched our classmates get gunned down on
> college campuses ....and waited for friends to come home
> from war who never did...and have buried children
> and parents and friends....and have sat through long
> nights holding strangers who wanted to die.
Why do you assume that if I'm only 23 I haven't experienced
anything like this? I've been through experiences like this
and more. I still remember, vividly, watching a good friend
be knifed to death in a riot...and losing 6 friends in a car
accident involving a drunk driver.
You don't have to be older to have suffered pain....but I
fail to see what that has to do with the label "girl" vs
"woman".
kath
|
724.17 | my opinion... | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | Food, Shelter & Diamonds | Fri Mar 31 1989 16:28 | 55 |
| I consider "girl" to be extremely offensive (similar to racial
slurs as Bonnie suggested) because of the history of men and women
and power in this country.
The only time I'll let it slide anymore is when I'm shopping with
my daughter. I realize that when
salespeople quickly glance at us they think at first that we're
both teenagers. We both have long hair and are wearing jeans.
I have noticed lately that when I'm shopping with my daughter they
say, "Can I help you girls?" When I'm with my #1 shopping friend,
Meryl, they say, "Can I help you ladies?" When I'm alone it might
be "Yes, Ma'am, can I help you with anything?" (These are usually
jewelry or antique stores.) So, I don't mind being called girl
when I realize the person hasn't taken a *close* look yet and is
still under the misguided notion that I'm closer to 20 than 40.
However, anybody who knows how close to 40 I am and calls me girl
had better be prepared to be verbally attacked because I'm sick
of this sh*t. It shows an extreme lack of respect to call a woman
over 30 girl, and I personally think that any female over 18 should
demand to be called a woman. A possible exception is the term
"girlfriend" which is a little different. That's a term to quickly
explain to somebody where someone fits into your life, so I can
accept it.
Re .6, Chelsea, while you may not register it if you hear someone
call a store clerk a girl, if you stop and think about it is pretty
rude. Just because somebody is doing a particular job that didn't
require a college degree doesn't mean they remain boys and girls
for ever.
I try to say "woman" all the time now when I refer to females over
18, just as I tried to say "black" instead of "colored" back in
the 60's when it was explained to me that Americans of African heritage
found "colored" offensive. Now saying "black" instead of "colored"
is second nature for most of us. I hope that someday the same can be
said of "woman" and "girl."
Re .2, Kath, I think that you *should* have been offended when that
men said to you in a meeting "Let's listen to what this girl has
to say." He would never say "Let's listen to what this boy has
to say" to a 23 yr. old male engineer with the same degree you have.
Why shouldn't you get the same respect? (I can almost hear the man
thinking, "Imagine this little gal being able to understand all
this stuff....and have a few ideas of her *own*, too!")
Also, Kath, regarding something else you said in another reply,
it's impossible for you to know what your opinions will be when
you're 40, just as it's impossible for me to know what mine will
be when I'm 60. But, I expect I will change my mind about
a few things in the next 21 yrs., as new evidence comes in.
Lorna
|
724.18 | And it doesn't make me any less of a woman! | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Now you're in Heaven.... | Fri Mar 31 1989 16:37 | 25 |
|
> Re .2, Kath, I think that you *should* have been offended when that
> men said to you in a meeting "Let's listen to what this girl has
> to say."
Isn't that the beauty of this world? We're all allowed to
be whoever we want to be. We do not have to accept anyone
else's thoughts and ideals unless we want to--and we are
allowed to reach to stimulus in whatever manner we see fit.
I doubt I would ever call another female "girl" to her face,
but if I did I would hope that she was adult enough to use
common courtesy when she tell's me she would rather it be
"woman."
Happy to be a girl.
kath
|
724.19 | | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | Food, Shelter & Diamonds | Fri Mar 31 1989 17:48 | 31 |
| Re .18, Kath, perhaps you are "Happy to be a girl" because in your
life you have yet to experience any negative aspects to being a
"girl". If so, you are fortunate, and I don't wish any on you.
However, you can probably imagine that if you were a 60 year old
legal secretary who had been married for years, had your own home,
raised children, and now had grandchildren, and had many years of
experience dealing with all aspects of being an adult in society
(paying taxes, voting, etc.), along with having a great deal of
experience as a legal secretary, and if your boss were a 35 year
old lawyer who habitually called you a "girl," you might not like
it, because you probably might realize that the reason he calls
you a girl is because he thinks he is better than you. He thinks
he is better than you because he has a law degree and makes big
bucks and demands respect, but you for all your life's experience
are just a secretary, just a "girl." You have no power and you
can't demand anything. You just have to accept what he chooses
to deal out to you, if you want your pay. I witnessed this attitude
a couple of years ago when I went to a lawyer for a consulation
for my divorce. As we wound up our little talk the attorney said,
"Stop at the desk on the way out and have my girl set up your next
appointment." His "girl" had bluish white hair set in little waves
and look around 60. He looked around 35. I wanted to say, "Oh,
okay, *boy*." (Naturally, I never went back.) Many of us (women)
who have less than professional jobs have been referred to as "girls"
long after we really *were* girls, as a way to remind us of our
lack of power, just as black men were called "boys" for years by
whites to remind them that in our society they had better not expect
to be treated like men.
Lorna
|
724.20 | Girls At Desk, Girls On Film, etc. | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | Food, Shelter & Diamonds | Fri Mar 31 1989 17:58 | 17 |
| This afternoon I had to pick up an envelope in the Upper Thompson
St. Lobby here at the Mill. While I was standing at the Reception
Desk waiting for my turn, I looked up to see a sign on the wall
in back of the desk that said, "GIRLS AT DESK." I thought, What
the heck does that mean? Then, I noticed that two name plaques
were stuck to the wall on either side of it, apparently telling
people that these are the names of the "girls" at the reception
desk. Imagine all the vendors and what not coming through the Thompson
St. Lobby in the course of a day having it reinforced on their
subconscious by Digital Equipment Corporation that female receptionists
are "girls" regardless of their age. Hey, I'm impressed by such
enlightened thinking! Aren't you? On behalf of all the other
female clerical types at DEC, I'd just like to say....nah, never
mind, I think I'll just go have a drink.
Lorna
|
724.22 | a female by any other name... | CSC32::PITT | | Fri Mar 31 1989 23:39 | 17 |
|
Once a month, my daughter and I (she's only 8 and I'm a little older),
go out on what we call "girls night out". At the same time, my
husband and 9 year old son do a "boys night out". It seems that
women don't 'resent' thinking of themselves or even being called
"girl" when they are referring to a group of peers (i.e going out
with the girls), as it is common to hear men saying "going out
-doing some man-thing- with the boys). Perhaps it is as dependant
on *OUR* mood when we are called one thing or another, as it is
on the mood of the person calling us *THAT NAME*.
In my opinion, I'm over 30 (don't let it get around) and I don't
care what you call me. It just gives me more incentive to come back
and make you eat your words...WHATEVER they happened to be.
cathy (not TOO much over 30)
|
724.23 | Don't wanna hear any whining about this one... | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Sat Apr 01 1989 00:23 | 22 |
| there's a song out called "I'm an Adult Now" one line says...
"I don't write songs about girls anymore, I have to write about
women."
I thought it was appropriate for this topic.
IM (Not humble) O....
Girl = a young at heart, fun loving, playful, carefree, spunky,
female human.(Notice it doesn't mean immature or anything
else condesending.)
Woman = a boring, old, boring, too mature, boring, stuck on themself,
and boring. (Let's not forget overpowering chestbeating femanists.)
So if you are being called a girl by me take it as a compliment.
Bill
Woman=
|
724.24 | OUCH!!!!!!! | SALEM::AMARTIN | Isallwaz Like,Wilzam,Wilze,Wilzutzu,Ze! | Sat Apr 01 1989 00:29 | 1 |
| I can feel this one.....
|
724.25 | Could you clarify???? | CASV02::SALOIS | Find out something only dead men know | Sat Apr 01 1989 00:56 | 17 |
|
"Woman = a boring, old, boring, too mature, boring, stuck on themself,
and boring. (Let's not forget overpowering chestbeating femanists.)"
Do you mean that any female who prefers to be called a "woman"
instead of a "girl" is "boring", "too mature" (wow! that's a new
one on me... too mature?!?!?)????
Or is "too mature" just more "woman" than you can handle?
"Overpowering chestbeating femanists(sic)"???????
Hmmm... seems I've had a few notes trashed by a certain moderator
for a helluva lot less.
Maybe I've just lost my "youthful glow"???
Gene~
|
724.26 | | HANDY::MALLETT | Barking Spider Industries | Sat Apr 01 1989 00:59 | 32 |
| re: .23
" -< Don't wanna hear any whining about this one... >- "
Is this to imply that you've heard "whining" about others?
If so, I'd be real curious to hear what you've interpreted
as "whining".
". . .a young at heart, fun loving, playful, carefree, spunky,
female human. . ."
That would be how I describe most of the women I know (of all ages).
I'd also describe most of them as intelligent, articulate, powerful,
compassionate, and aware.
"Woman = a boring, old, boring, too mature, boring, stuck on themself,
and boring. (Let's not forget overpowering chestbeating femanists" (sic)
We obviously move in *very* different circles; I can safely say
I know of no women who answer that description. I am curious, though,
Bill - since you used the word four times, how do these "boring"
women you know manifest that behavior? What is it that they do
or say that strikes you as boring?
"So if you are being called a girl by me take it as a compliment."
If you were in a business meeting with female employees you didn't
know, Bill, would you use the term "girls"?
Steve
|
724.27 | Not aimed at anyone..just how I define it... | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Sat Apr 01 1989 01:36 | 10 |
| All my coments do not refer to anyone in this or any other conference.
My note doesn't make reference to anyone, it is just my definition
of the two words.......
No I don't mean anyone who prefers to call herself a woman is what
I mentioned. They have their own definition of the word. I just
was saying what I call a woman is.
Bill
|
724.28 | Girls....Girls.....Girls..... | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Sat Apr 01 1989 01:53 | 21 |
| re: .26
"whining" to me is trying to make me change my mind when I don't
want to. I'll be open for arguments, but I don't want badgering.
The reason I find them "boring" is that they are generally stuck
on silly things like being called a woman or a girl. They generally
go about stuck on the fact that they are in fact female and state,
"I am WOMAN". I say in reply "Big Deal, what's it to ya'. I see
you as another person, not as a woman, girl, white, black, oriental,
older person, younger person, but *just* another person. " Everyone
is created equal, and I believe in equal rights for all, I don't
care what you are so don't restate the obvious by telling me.
As for calling a bunch of females in a meeting girls. You bet I
would! That's just me, if I said anything else it wouldn't be me.
It's a good thing that I'm an Art Student, that way I won't be in
buisiness meetings and I won't tick people off.
Bill
|
724.29 | context is everything | CSC32::KOLBE | | Sat Apr 01 1989 02:56 | 9 |
| Well Bill, You can call me a girl in a business meeting but only
if you refer to the male members as boys in the same context. I
would call people "boys and girls" jokingly but only with people
I was close with. I suspect it would rather hurt my business stature
if I called my manager a boy to often.
Well, this "girl" has to get back to her V5.2 upgrade so the "boys"
will have a computer to work on tomorrow. You know how they get
when their toys don't work. liesl
|
724.30 | The Brazen youth.... | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Sat Apr 01 1989 08:12 | 10 |
| Yep I would even start out by saying "Hello Boys and girls..."
If they can't take life a little less serious then I don't wanna
work for 'em. Too much stressed out people give me headaches.
I'm a very unstructured person and I don't like conforming. I approach
life with the attitude that everything laid back unless you make
a big deal about it. I try not to make a big deal about much. Kinda
a rebel without a cause....
Bill
|
724.31 | difference in point of view | WMOIS::B_REINKE | If you are a dreamer, come in.. | Sun Apr 02 1989 15:57 | 22 |
| Bill,
In another conference you gave your age as 21, and from your personal
name I assume that you are recently out of college. I find your
attitude rather interesting since it is very different from my
own son who is 19 and now in college. The persons of female gender
at his college are quite firm about wishing to be called women
and not having much patience with males who call them girls. My
son has corrected me from time to time on my occasional slips in
terminology.
I find it rather interesting that you reacted in such a negative
fashion to the notes about the use of 'women' vs 'girl' since those
of us who first brought it up definitely used a light and a humorous
touch in our first few replies.
I have no intention of preaching at you, however, may I offer one
suggestion? If you do intend to move ahead in the business world,
calling your male and female superiors 'boys and girls' isn't
particularly condusive to upward mobility.
Bonnie
|
724.32 | Wo-man: pronounced Whoa, Man! | HAMSTR::IRLBACHER | A middle class bag lady | Sun Apr 02 1989 21:35 | 14 |
| Even tho' I had such a good time this weekend visiting and working
with some talented and interesting women (oops! girls? uhhh, fe-males?
or, ladies?---oh, what the heck!) I wish I had read Bill's note
sooner.
Then I could have taken my boring old woman's bod with its giggling
and carefree heart and dashed over to *his* house and played
in his sandbox! I have the neatest sand strainer and shovel
with a matching pail.
Darn! I missed having a better time somewhere else over the weekend
*again*.
M. who_is_WOMAN_and_boring???????
|
724.33 | Grins... | SUPER::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Sun Apr 02 1989 22:51 | 14 |
|
Ya' know?
Of all the things that I have been called in my life,
[too numerous to mention...chuckle]...
Boring has never come up...
[ I *will* not succomb to that straight line...I
will *not*...what the hey...oh well...]
...neither has young....
Melinda
|
724.34 | | ACESMK::CHELSEA | Mostly harmless. | Sun Apr 02 1989 23:01 | 40 |
| Re: .13
>Could it be that maybe the younger generation has decided that
>labels really don't matter.
Anecdotal evidence, I know, but: I'm a member of the younger
generation and I do think they matter.
Re: .17 and shop clerks
A lot of them are young women in their early twenties (if that old),
which is why it doesn't seem so strange. I would find it strange
to hear it applied to an older woman. It seems that some jobs are
held by young people, predominantly -- fast food stores, mall clothing
stores, etc.
Re: .23
>So if you are being called a girl by me take it as a compliment.
Are you claiming, then, that the burden of communication is on the
receiver and not the sender?
I think one of the reasons that this whole thing has been going
on so long is that your position implies, "I don't care what you
think, I'm going to do what I want to make myself happy and your
reaction to it is none of my concern." As a master of selfishness,
I have no trouble recognizing it when I see it. Most of those who
have expressed a wish to be called women have acknowledged that
they can accept "girl" in certain contexts. In other words, they
have shown a degree of flexibility and compromise. You, on the
other hand, are going to do things your own way and, if we don't
like it, that's our problem. I suspect that many women have been
looking for a similar compromise on your part and it seems fairly
obvious that it's not going to happen.
Folks, stop trying. Bill doesn't care what you think.
P.S. By declaration of the Tuna Master, you are hereby proclaimed
to be a tuna.
|
724.35 | | HAMSTR::IRLBACHER | A middle class bag lady | Mon Apr 03 1989 08:57 | 15 |
| "Younger generation" *is* a label.
"Boring" is a label.
"Older generation" is a label.
And "Girl" and "Woman" said in certain ways, with certain voice
inflections accompanied with certain body language, is a label.
Society in general labels everything and everyone.
But the *good shopper* bypasses the labels for the contents, and chooses
the product for its worth.
M who_is_going_to_be_labeled_as_a_smart_a*s_if_she_doesn't_quit_noting
|
724.36 | Watch the flame... | BROWNY::DUFFY | | Mon Apr 03 1989 11:15 | 47 |
| A few years ago may wife and I participated in an examination of
books used in our school district's elementary classes. The purpose
was to document (not preach or offer opinions) the depiction of
males and females in books used in all subjects. The students using
those books are NOW in college and high school; the town was/is
a suburb of Boston, within the 128 beltway, which is quite wealthy
and has a reputation for excellent schools.
An opinionated summary (mine) of the results was that girls watched
and cheered while boys dared, risked, acted, played... There was
only 1 active female portrayed in the pictures in the entire set of
books [nine years ago]. It seemed that boys grew up to become "men,"
that is, they took on a variety of roles as they became older,
supported by their womenfolk (mothers, wives..). Girls became wives
and mothers, but were not capable of self-definition in these stories.
When I was later on the School Committee of this same town, I had the
opportunity to become embroiled in a minor controversy with the
Superintendent and Director of Athletics re. funding for sports.
The girls' teams/activities received far less money than the boys', but
we were working on a formula which responded to participation (per
capita cost) and availability (number of sports activities available
to girls or to boys). Soccer, tennis, and basketball were pretty
good models, and the per capita expenditures were fairly even for
male or female participants. Hockey was outrageously expensive
(as any "hockey parent" can attest, as was football. But the
Superintendent, at his most creative, pointed out that, at least
ball had a "matching" female activity. Yes, CHEERLEADING. And, yes,
he was serious.
[btw, you can decide for yourself which you prefer: girls'/boys'
or female/male sports (or men's/women's) so that budding
editorial geniuses can rewrite the paragraph without having to
think too much]
I have a number of professional colleagues (in academic, music, and
digital activities) who can call me just about anything (and vice
versa). We got to that point with each other the "old fashioned way,"
we earned each other's respect, and our relationships are grounded
in that respect. Yeah, then the things we call each other are
not context-free and stereotypical; they are sensitive to context
and individual.
This is why I don't have any patience with the Bills of the world who
are either too insensitive, too lazy, too inexperienced, or too selfish
too acknowledge the issue in the first place.
Beam me up, Scottie...
|
724.37 | Must have been an APRIL FOOL | BROWNY::DUFFY | | Mon Apr 03 1989 11:24 | 5 |
| Ah, yes -- got me again.
I couldn't find Mr. Akins in ELF, so I reread .30, thinking "THIS
MUST BE A HOAX." Does the date APRIL 1 have the significance
I wish to give it.
I bit.
|
724.38 | maybe | WMOIS::B_REINKE | If you are a dreamer, come in.. | Mon Apr 03 1989 11:40 | 7 |
| If it was a hoax, it has to have been a pretty extensive one.
Mr Akins has shown up earlier in this file and also in soapbox.
Kind of an elaborate build up for a one day hoax.
but possible.
Bonnie
|
724.39 | hope springs | BROWNY::DUFFY | | Mon Apr 03 1989 12:21 | 4 |
| re. .38
I was just hoping there was some explanation.
|
724.40 | Hi Duffy! | HARDY::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Mon Apr 03 1989 12:58 | 7 |
|
Duffy....
There *is* an explanation...it just isn't the
one you hoped for....
M-
|
724.41 | A question of labels | SEDSWS::FLOYD | | Mon Apr 03 1989 14:07 | 17 |
| To the female listeners...
When you refer to going out with your buddy, female, do you call
her your "girlfriend"? My sister 28 and aunts of various ages over
40 when they are going out as a group or with other female friends
refer to it as "going out with the girls" They would never say going
out with "the women".
Its all a question of context. Surely as long as the label is not
said in a defamatory way then the label doesn't matter?
There are lots of derogatory ways in which the sexes refer to each
other but does it really matter? Surelt the best way to deal with
that sort of comment is to ignore it. So if you don't like being
called a girl ignore it.
Jon
|
724.42 | Priorities... | SUPER::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Mon Apr 03 1989 14:28 | 19 |
|
Well....
First or all, No, I do not refer to my female friends
as "girls"....the few women who I consider real friends
look, act, and talk like women....you know the old
saying..."If it looks like a duck...."?
Second of all, in entirely *personal/social* settings
I would tend to agree with you. Totally.
However, I feel none of us is blind to the implications
that casual remarks, off-the-cuff comments, and general
intra-office interaction can play in our careers.
In accordance with that knowlege, it remains important
to address women in a manner that represents their
professionalism.
Melinda
|
724.43 | Down home teachin' | MPO::GILBERT | The Wild Rover - MAXCIM Program Office | Mon Apr 03 1989 14:31 | 9 |
| re: .36
FYI - Most teachers/administrators I know stay away from textbooks
wherever possible. You see this Massachusetts and we just don't
do things the same way as Texas and California. If a publisher
can't sell a textbook in Texas or California he won't publish
it.
|
724.44 | It is context related | WMOIS::B_REINKE | If you are a dreamer, come in.. | Mon Apr 03 1989 14:57 | 20 |
| in re .41 Jon
Please go back to note 724.8 and my note on transactional anaylsis.
When a group of women go out together and they call each other
girls this is a peer type relationship. They are all equals and
have mutually agreed to relate at the 'child' or 'buddy' level.
I would be quite comfortable with 'girl' or 'boy' in a social
group of good friends.
A work situation, however, is not the same thing, the supervisor
or manager is in a adult role. When he or she addresses a co worker
by 'girl' or 'boy' then they have put themself into a parent-child
relationship with that co worker..*even* if that was not their intent.
There is a difference between the cameraderie after hours and the
professionalism that we are due from our superiors and peers in
a work environment.
Bonnie
|
724.45 | | HANDY::MALLETT | Barking Spider Industries | Mon Apr 03 1989 16:16 | 35 |
| re: .34
In regards to that last large paragraph. . .yeah!. . .what you
said! Poifect!
re: .41
When I was serving time in Texas, blacks would occasionally use
the term "boy" or "nigger" in referring to one another in a closed
group; I was not part of that group and didn't have the right to
use the term (and I valued my life as well. . .) The point, Jon,
is that "girl" has historically been used by men to repress women
(and some of that history is as recent as this morning). How a
repressed group of people feels about a particular label amongst
themselves is one thing (often it's expression of unity), but used
by one of the oppressor group, the connotation is felt *very*
negatively.
Yes, delivery and context are extremely important, but I think that
in some instances, all the smiling good-naturedness still will not
yield a successful transaction. F'rinstance, (Bill) imagine yourself
walking into a meeting; there are a number of people there including
several women and men; the men are all members of one minority or
another; most of the people are in their mid-thirties or older.
Do you really think your "Hi boys and girls!" remark is going to
play well? Did you ever stop to consider, as Chelsea indicates,
that these people grew up with their experiences, not Bill's?
This isn't an argument for what "should" or "should not" be; it's
a discussion of how real people feel today and when someone starts
telling me how I "should" feel (based on *their* perception of *their*
remarks) I know I'm with someone who's not listening very well.
Steve
|
724.46 | I'm ever sooooo sorry if I bothered you... | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Mon Apr 03 1989 20:54 | 54 |
| Hi ladies and gentlemen....
I was going to take the time and reply to each of you by picking
out key words and slowly and tediously pay close attention to each
one. As I was reading all the replys I noticed that all save one
were nothing but condemning my opinion. As I stated earlier, I
did not aim the gun (note) at anyone in this conference or any where
else for that matter. I in return was called a "selfish" person.
What ever happened to not attacking another noter for his/her opinion?
In my note I just stated my definitions of the words. I did not
call anyone a woman nor did I call anyone "boring".
Why am I being selfish? Just because I feel the word "woman"
to be boring, I'm selfish? Just because I didn't change my opinion
to what the masses think makes me "selfish" (like on noter specifically
stated.)? Don't I have the right to my opinion and don't I have
the right to state it as much as anyone. It was a cute little
conversation about it being an April Fool's day joke. It wasn't.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you really knew me and
I refered to you as a "woman" I'd be insulted. All my friends who
do know me expect to be called "girl" or "boy" or even things like
"hun", "buddy", "darling", "dude" or things like that. If someone
who knew me heard me call them any thing proper they would think
something is wrong. I must be doing something right because I have
lots of "girls", "boys", "buddies", "pals" who enjoy my fresh attitude
towards the strict structure of society. I'm a rebel and I don't
care for labels because it is the person that counts. "Woman" sounds
to stuffy for me.
Let's get one thing clear...I will be polite enough to refer
to strangers as men and women, but once I feel comfortable with
them I don't care how old, sophisticated, mature, liberated or more
intelligent they are they will all be treated the same friendly
matter. Formality has it's place but with me it's not often.
As for getting ahead in the buisness world...I never wanted to and
never will....the buisness type lifestyle doesn't apply to me.
It doesn't float my boat. I'm hear because I need money for school.
If I happen to get a decent job opportunity working in an artistic
setting maybe DEC has something for me else its just another job.
One deffinition of GUY...from WEBSTERS...
GUY- (n) 4)British. One who is odd or grotesque in appearance or
dress.
I don't know about anyone else but I still don't mind being called
a guy, but I'm sure that all of you think that I match the description
in the dictionary just because my opinion differs from yours and
that I'm not willing to concede to your beliefs.
A selfish Bill
|
724.47 | I'll reply while they're reloading! | COMET::BERRY | Save a tree... kill a beaver. | Tue Apr 04 1989 05:04 | 11 |
| -1
Yes Bill, you do have a right to your own opinion. You can expect
challenges to it, and sometimes, in NOTES, you'll feel like the "Lone
Ranger." I respect a person for stating and forming his/her own opinion
and not simply going with the herd.
After all of these replies, I bet when you drink a glass of water
that you look like a sprinkler head from all those bullet holes!
:^) Dwight :^)
|
724.48 | His antlers aren't big enough... | SUPER::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Tue Apr 04 1989 11:30 | 15 |
|
Dwight....
I can only think of three reasons to shoot something:\
1. To eat it
2. To protect myself from bodily injury
3. To hang it on my wall
I don't think I want/need to do any of those things with
Bill....
[grin]
Melinda
|
724.49 | | HANDY::MALLETT | Barking Spider Industries | Tue Apr 04 1989 12:30 | 28 |
| re: .46
Perhaps you could point out clearly where your opinion has
been "condemned". As far as I can see, it hasn't; other
differing opinions have been offered and some of these
challenge yours. And one person, indicating she herself
has acted selfishly sometimes, said that she recognized the
behavior in you.
There's a reason for this: yes, Bill, you can call people
whatever you will, but you don't seem to care what the other
person wants to be called - that's a selfish act. If a person
has made it clear that he doesn't want to be called a "boy"
will you still do so? Or a "girl"? I think that's all people
are trying to say - you wish to be called "Bill". . .a "guy".
Fine and so be it. Will you grant that courtesy to others,
that they be called what *they* wish?
If yes, please consider the medium of NOTES. We can't know
ahead of time who's reading our messages and how they wish
to be addressed. In this case, doesn't it make sense to use
the "default" form of address for strangers? In a sense, when
we note, we *are* in a meeting, potentially full of strangers -
for every note writer, how many readers might there be?.
Does that make any sense?
Steve
|
724.50 | | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Now you're in Heaven.... | Tue Apr 04 1989 13:18 | 15 |
|
>> In this case, doesn't it make sense to use
>> the "default" form of address for strangers?
And just what, pray tell, Mr. Mallett is the "default" form
of address? Are "we" assuming that your default is my default
and is Bill's default?
Please enlighten me as to what the "default" form of address
for strangers is....I musta missed that point in my "ettiquite"
class... maybe I just missed my ettiquite class all together?
kath
|
724.51 | default | WMOIS::B_REINKE | If you are a dreamer, come in.. | Tue Apr 04 1989 13:41 | 6 |
| The defualt form of address would be the one least likely to
offend. Or the one most recommended by such sources of
guidance as ettiquette books, Valuing Difference workshop
leaders etc etc. i.e. 'women'.
Bonnie
|
724.52 | I Agree With You.... | SUPER::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Tue Apr 04 1989 14:03 | 10 |
|
> ..............I musta missed that point in my "ettiquite"
> class... maybe I just missed my ettiquite class all together?
Yes, I think it's fairly obvious that you did.
Melinda
|
724.53 | | HANDY::MALLETT | Barking Spider Industries | Tue Apr 04 1989 15:36 | 24 |
| re: .50
Bonnie (.51) states it well; since, so far as I've heard, no
adult female has objected to the use of "women" and since
several have objected to the use of "girls", particularly
in a business situation, it seems to me that the default in
this instance is "women". And we *are* in a business situation
here. Although we're not discussing direct hits to the P&L
statement, part of DEC's philosophy is that a workforce that
values one another is more productive; as Bonnie alludes, the
exchanges that go on here fall under the unbrella of Valuing
Differences.
Steve
P.S. Lest you think I'm "hooked" on one word or another, I have,
in delivering classes and conducting meetings, used terms like
"boys", "girls", "bozos" "idiots" and so on. However *well before*
using those terms, I establish a personal relationship with the
other individuals (which acknowledges that I'm a "boy" and a bigger
idiot/bozo than them) and I check to make sure that my words are
not upsetting them. The way I do that is to ask and then listen
to and respect their answer.
|
724.54 | I love to play devil's advocate! | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Now you're in Heaven.... | Tue Apr 04 1989 15:54 | 41 |
|
RE: Steve....I have talked to females that ARE offended by the word
"woman", in fact there are times *I* have been offended by its
usage.
> Or the one most recommended by such sources of
> guidance as ettiquette books, Valuing Difference workshop
> leaders etc etc. i.e. 'women'.
Maybe I'm wrong, but aren't these just prominent people's
opinions? Just because they are well-known people, does that
mean their opinion should apply to me?
My point is that no one should select for me what my
"default" is and how I should address people. I will always
continue making every decision in my life based on what *I*
feel is right and what *I* feel comfortable with. We can all
wish to be called what ever we want, but we cannot force
someone else to be pychic about what that default is. AND we
cannot expect everyone in the world to conform to what we
feel is "right."
This discussion is no longer about whether I wish to be
called one thing and someone else wishes to be called another
thing. It is now a discussion about whether or not we should
be allowed to have our own opinion and whether someone else
has the right to tell another that they are wrong and should
change.
FWIW: Please notice I've yet to state in this note what MY
"default" is--my default no longer pertains to this
discussion.
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make the horse
drink.
kath
|
724.55 | After all this??? | ANT::MPCMAIL | | Tue Apr 04 1989 17:29 | 21 |
| After reading the base note and 54 replies I can only say/write
what I feel onthis subject.
1. Please don't call me girl call me by my first name if you
know me well enough to call me girl.
2. re.23 women old boring??/ Please don't ever let my 83 year
old grandmother who has a bum leg but still manages to drive (managed
the nickname crash, a favorite in our family), gets on stage and
dances with the seniors, and climbs down the embankment to walk
the dog! She sooner shoot you!
3. I am over the age of girl I am over the age of 18 and I demand
some respect!
4. Did you ever notice when the guys go out and they come home
and you ask who did you meet, the reply can be from their real names
to the usal gang or Gorilla, MutfaceEtc while women say Sue, Jane
Sally?
5. Most of important if somebody does call me by a name I'd rather
not be called I take these actions
a) let the person know what I'd be called if no avail I tell
the person if this persists then I can no longer talk to them.
lisa
|
724.56 | How about "Excuse me Miss (Mr.)?" | SSDEVO::NGUYEN | | Tue Apr 04 1989 17:48 | 5 |
| Being a tender foot in this country and ignorant of English, I can
not say much, just have a question. Would it be ok to call someone
"Miss" or "Mr." if you don't know that person at all? When I was
in college, my friends laughed at me a lot for saying that, but
they never explained to me why or what I should use instead.
|
724.57 | :-) | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | I'll pick a white rose with Plantagenet. | Tue Apr 04 1989 18:06 | 7 |
| The phrasing generally used is "'Scuse me, {sir | ma'am | miss}."
Here's where a nice Southern accent can help. With one, the latter
two choices can be compressed into "myz" (like "miz", but with
more of a twang), and groups of two or more people can be addressed
as "y'all".
Ann B.
|
724.58 | A+ | HARDY::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Tue Apr 04 1989 19:03 | 15 |
|
RE: .56
You were and are absolutely correct in using the
terms Mr or Miss or Mrs when in doubt.
You were laughed at for the very same reason.
It is a standard response for people [in our country
anyway] to respond with derision or humor towards
things they do not understand or comprehend.
Our loss.
Melinda
|
724.59 | Go back GO.... | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Tue Apr 04 1989 20:55 | 18 |
| Steve...
If you would be so kind and reread my notes (ignoring the spelling
and concentrating on the words :-) ) I have stated that If I knew
if it really bothered someone I would try not to call them that.
I wouldn't make promises because that's asking a tiger to change
his stripes.
If you want to find out which notes condemn my opinion reread all
the replies. I was not the only person who noticed the knives being
thrown. I don't have to time to go back and pick out live by line
each example.
As I think more on this subject...The words women or girls rarely
come up in my conversations when I'm directly talking to someone.
I may refer to a group, but hardly ever singularly.
Bill
|
724.60 | The elderly are "way cool!" | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Tue Apr 04 1989 21:00 | 16 |
| Oh yeah and one other thing I forgot....
to the people that keep claiming I called Old Women boring.
I didn't ....I said the word "women" to me is defined as boring,
and old. If your grandmother or any other elderly person is driving
a car and dancing the night away, then in my opinion she is a "Fun
Old Girl" 'cause she sure aint actin' her age...and anyone younger
then her is a girl to her...(by a few years....I'm sure your alway's
going to be mommy and daddy's little girl no matter how old you
are.)
I think Old people are some of the most exciting people to hang
out with....
Bill
|
724.61 | let's get to where the rubber meets the road | COMET::BERRY | Save a tree... kill a beaver. | Tue Apr 04 1989 23:29 | 34 |
| Golly...gee... this note isn't about calling someone something after it's
clear that they object to that ...name. It's turned into another kind of
debate, mainly conforming to the thought pattern of the majority, or at
least to those who might have some "strings attached" .... as in who pay's
your salary, perhaps.
I tend to agree with Kath on this thing about not wanting/letting someone else
decide or tell me what I should "think" ..... "automatically." (OK Kathy...we
find ourselves in agreement in another file!)
And if we let someone decide for us, should we get together and throw a blanket
party for some person that somehow didn't read the system message and still
thinks he/she's an individual???
And if we truly value differences.... why do we condemn a person for their
"default" opinion or reasoning if it doesn't agree with the collective body???
Is this not the "pot calling the kettle, black"???
Is this not a socialistic form of programming??? Are we to be trained like
seals on how to think/react/respond by a collective body??? Should we let our
own "boss" or whoever is paying our salary decide what the "nature of our
thoughts" will be??? Do we, in this fast paced society, give up the human
quality of being able to reason for ourselves... to hide in the multitude... to
lose our own identity... to give up this personal freedom which our forefathers
fought and died for??? Are we reduced to political pawns???
I'm not a rebel without a cause, but I'll not allow anyone tell me how I should
think or feel. What I "think" is what I "think." What I "feel" is what
I "feel."
To tell me what to think or feel, or even expect, is wrong, and I'll not debate
it. It's not open for debate. That's how I "feel," pilgrim.
Dwight
|
724.62 | | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Wed Apr 05 1989 01:26 | 3 |
| .61 very well put....
The Rebel
|
724.63 | where's the noose! 8^0 | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Now you're in Heaven.... | Wed Apr 05 1989 02:20 | 12 |
| .Dwight> (OK Kathy...we find ourselves in agreement in another file!)
We've gotta stop agreeing like this, someone could get the
wrong impression! 8^)
Very well put, you stole the words right outta my mouth.
("THIEF! THIEF!") 8^)
g'night boys! 8^)
kath
|
724.64 | then agian I never met a boring Beholder | YODA::BARANSKI | Incorrugatible! | Wed Apr 05 1989 15:18 | 3 |
| In my opinion, boring is in the eyes of the beholder :-)
Jim.
|
724.65 | | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Wed Apr 05 1989 22:59 | 3 |
| .64 absolutely right....
The Rebel
|
724.68 | I'm afraid you mistook me for a toilet. | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Thu Apr 06 1989 20:11 | 110 |
|
> The combination of the quoted statements, in their context, create
> a very strong impression of "I'm going to do what I want to do and
> I don't care what you think about it." On the one hand, we have
> repeated assertions of his determination to call females girls;
> on the other hand, we have no acknowledgement of the concerns of
> women who don't want to be called girls. In fact, he dismisses
> them as silly or unimportant.
Please refer to note .6 where I distinctly state...
"I will try to be careful around people that it bothers."
> And so we have Bill displaying the same behavior he finds so
> objectionable -- an unwillingness to credit another's point of view.
> Those who have objected to Bill's point of view have not dismissed
> it. Rather, they have addressed the points on which they differ
> and tried to explain their position. These explanations have also
> been dismissed.
Looks like your doing the same thing you accuse me of. Please re
read my notes. I state several times that it is just my opinion.
I have listened to others and still choose to feel the way I do.
> In the final analysis, it looks like Bill isn't really interested
> in communicating. He expresses himself without examining how his
> words will be received by his listeners and he doesn't really listen
> to those who are addressing him.
Please refer back to .6, .27, .46, .59
All of which I say that I make efforts to change my ways to people
I offend.
> Now then, I have laid out my observations and my conclusions. If
> I am wrong, it should be an easy thing to point out any incorrect
> observation(s) and/or conclusion(s).
Yes it is easy.
> What do I see as selfish? Well, there's this from .23:
>>So if you are being called a girl by me take it as a compliment.
>In other words, Bill is telling us how to change our reactions to
>suit him. Some women have already explained why they would not
>be able to do so, but that seems to have made no impression on Bill.
>I don't recall seeing him even acknowledge their concerns.
No I'm not saying that. I guess I could have worded it better.
The point I was trying to make was that I don't intend on insulting
someone when I refer to them as a girl. Being called a girl by
me is meant to be complimentary. I'm just trying to clarify that
point just in case I slip and accidently call someone who gets offended
a girl.
>Now, in .28, we have another example of inflammatory titling:
> -< Girls....Girls.....Girls..... >-
>It is not unreasonable that he is refering to participants in the
>discussion, including those who have firmly expressed a desire not
>to be called "girl" except in specific contexts.
Hardly...I'm sorry if you took it that way. My title was taken
from the Motley Crue song of the same title. I had no intention
of insulting you or anyone else. I did state that I do not aim
my notes at any noters ( I've learned my lesson in an earlier note.)
Another expression of selfishness:
>>They generally go about stuck on the fact that they are in fact
>>female and state, "I am WOMAN". I say in reply "Big Deal, what's
>>it to ya'.
> Bill can't see that it is, in fact, something significant to them.
> He's too absorbed with his own view of how things should be.
No. It's just my opinion. I explained it further in the note how
I view everyone equally and how I don't like the restating the obvious.
I know a woman when I see one, unless my anatomy class was wrong
:-).
But this is what really convinced me:
>>As for calling a bunch of females in a meeting girls. You bet I
>>would! That's just me, if I said anything else it wouldn't be me.
>In other words, Bill can't make the compromises necessary to get
>along with other people of different views. That is, after all,
>a significant part of dealing with people.
Please refer to the above mentioned notes...I do state that I am
willing to try and compromise my beliefs so that others won't be
offended. I still admit to not agreeing with the philosophy that
being called a girl is an insult but I can alter my actions
accordingly.
The Rebel
(Who doesn't appreciate being flamed by someone who only reads what
she wants to read.)
|
724.69 | Just a 'nother brick in the wall.... | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Hey Kids, rock and roll, rock on.... | Thu Apr 06 1989 22:51 | 33 |
|
RE: .68
Well, Bill, I'm glad you took what I consider to be a
personal attack so well.
People read what they want to read...I've been repeatedly
told through mail that Bill and I have not been "condemned"
for our views....I'm too lazy to go back and pluck out the
5-7 replies where this did happen...I could also care less
who condemns me....I will believe what I wish to believe in.
> > -< Girls....Girls.....Girls..... >-
> Hardly...I'm sorry if you took it that way. My title was taken
> from the Motley Crue song of the same title.
Hey, Bill! I knew the song! In fact when I read the note,
that tune was running through my head! But what do you
expect from us young'uns? Motley Cr�e isn't exactly
everyone's type of music...but! Not everyone can have taste,
eh?
Next time, how 'bout we all read what is said, not what we
want to read. And can the personal attacks, their not
welcome.
"Minds are like parachutes, they only work when they're open."
kath
|
724.70 | | WMOIS::B_REINKE | If you are a dreamer, come in.. | Thu Apr 06 1989 23:10 | 17 |
| in re .69
in re minds and parachutes...
having known Chelsea through notes for a couple of years..
she has one of the more open minds in the notes community..
sometimes people get angry/hostile when criticisms hit to close
to home.
if someone is tempted to just blast another noter for their
response...try looking inside and taking the time to figure
out why you get so defensive and hostile..then step back a few
paces and try and express your thoughts from the point of view
of someone who doesn't agree with you.
Bonnie
|
724.71 | and childish... | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Hey Kids, rock and roll, rock on.... | Thu Apr 06 1989 23:38 | 12 |
|
.70> in re minds and parachutes...
.70> having known Chelsea through notes for a couple of years..
.70>
.70> she has one of the more open minds in the notes community..
I wasn't directing it to Chelsea...I was directing it to this
entire note. Its gone down the gutter and all its acheiving
is a bunch of bickering and anger. Its ridiculous...
kath
|
724.72 | Can we now bury what's left of that poor horse...? | MCIS2::AKINS | College....The Big Lie | Thu Apr 06 1989 23:53 | 8 |
| I expected it...It happens when a bunch of BOXERs get on opposite
sides of an argument. There are alot of digs and bloodshed. I
still respect the opinions of the folks who disagreed with me.
To all no hard feelings....
The Rebel (plus I got a neet new nickname because of it...:-) )
|
724.73 | | SOJU::CHELSEA | | Fri Apr 07 1989 00:49 | 42 |
| Re: .68
If we're getting historical, let's take a look at note 78.67, which
I wrote on 29 March. In it, I asked several questions, trying to
understand why you believed what you did. Your next response was
in 78.69, in which you stated that you found this discussion rather
amusing and implied that people were getting upset over nothing
("it's just a label"). Since people had already explained why they
found "girl" to be inappropriate, you completely dismissed their
concerns. You then compounded your insensitivity with a statement
along the lines of "If you were truly a woman, you wouldn't get
upset over a mere label." That is an insult to all women who prefer
to be called women. And the words "In my opinion" never appeared.
So you see, Bill, I tried to be patient and understanding. I tried
again in 78.70. But you were just laughing at the idea of the silly
females getting their panties in a wad over a little label. It amused
you; you stated that several times. Since the beginning of this
discussion, you have failed to take the concerns of women into
consideration. I tried to listen to your concerns, but you wouldn't
tell them to me. So I lost patience. I see no reason to continue
granting you consideration when you aren't interested in returning
the favor.
Now you've found that you can't just laugh this off; too many people
are willing to let such an attitude lie unchallenged. It's too late
to cry foul now, Bill. You had your chance to communicate in a
reasonable and reasoning environment. You had several chances,
offered by several women. You ignored them all, laughed them off.
We got the message. People frequently do unto others as has been
done unto them. If you feel you're being treated with a lack of
consideration, perhaps it's because we've gotten the impression that
consideration isn't very important to you.
>It's just my opinion. I explained it further in the note how I
>view everyone equally and how I don't like the restating the obvious.
The quoted phrase was "Big Deal, what's it to ya'." That is one
of the most insensitive responses I have ever heard. Obviously,
if someone is upset, that matter is something to them. To them,
this is a big deal. That phrase is a classic example of that heinous
political sin of invalidating someone's feelings.
|
724.74 | Very icidic.... | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Hey Kids, rock and roll, rock on.... | Fri Apr 07 1989 01:23 | 36 |
724.75 | Get off my back will ya.... | MCIS2::AKINS | A Rebel without a cause.... | Fri Apr 07 1989 01:28 | 25 |
| Why not go back even further...
My first note(74.56) on the subject was just a questioning and a stating
that I thought the whole thing was silly. Obviously that was in
my opinion. I got blasted by you in .58 and I replied very casually
stating how the "girls" I date don't mind being called "girls".
Then I got blasted away at some more. I wrote .66 because I was
defending a barrage of people who disagreed with my opinion. I
was told that "I never knew a *woman*.", and other nasty things.
I replied with the same force. Of course I should have just ignored
it. But I did not like being condemned for my opinion. I .66 I
was just dishing back what I had already taken from you and others.
When this note opened my first reply stated that I thought this
was beating a dead horse. Yet people continued to condemn me
because I find nothing wrong with the word "girl". I then got
a bit irked and told my exact definitions of both words. This
brought down the house. I am now forced to explain the whole
history of my reactions so that some who were too lazy to read
everything won't have a kitten over it. Now do I personelly attack
you....No I don't. If you don't like my opinion disagree with me.
Do not attack. It is unbecoming of a lady, woman or girl.
|
724.76 | oooops.... | MCIS2::AKINS | A Rebel without a cause.... | Fri Apr 07 1989 01:30 | 4 |
| I'm sorry that would be #78 not #74....
The Rebel
|
724.77 | | SOJU::CHELSEA | | Fri Apr 07 1989 02:27 | 92 |
| Re: .75
>Get off my back will ya....
Nope. I don't just walk away from things I feel strongly about.
>My first note(74.56) on the subject was just a questioning and
>a stating that I thought the whole thing was silly.
You also used the word "girlish." Given the comments of some of
the participants, that was, at the least, unwise. By stating that
you thought the discussion silly, you implied that the concerns
of the participants were silly. Invalidating concerns is dangerously
close to invalidating feelings.
>I got blasted by you in .58
This is my 78.58:
>Re: .56
>
>>what's in a name....
>
>Connotations/implications that feed attitudes/prejudices. What
>image does the name Irwin bring to mind? Ethel? Stanley?
>
>The same principles apply to a number of words. Anyone who takes
>communication seriously needs to be aware of the connotations of
>words; that is the essence of diction.
Since I wrote it, I naturally have a very definite context for this,
but I'm having a hard time seeing how this could be interpreted
as "blasting." Those paragraphs, as far as I can tell, could as
easily have come from a textbook on communications or writing.
>When this note opened my first reply stated that I thought this
>was beating a dead horse.
Which, given the tone of your previous notes, carried the implication
that you considered the opinions of some of the women silly and
of no real value.
>Yet people continued to condemn me because I find nothing wrong
>with the word "girl".
My impression is that they condemn not so much your opinion as your
reasons for holding it. Certainly I've found them less than
persuasive. Frankly, I find your definition of "woman" to be
stereotypical in the extreme and I have little patience for such.
>I then got a bit irked and told my exact definitions of both words.
I find it's usually best to define terms in the beginning.
>If you don't like my opinion disagree with me.
I have. Politely. With honest questions. Which were never answered.
If something doesn't work, why continue doing it?
>Do not attack. It is unbecoming of a lady, woman or girl.
Oh, dear, that is an unfortunate bit of self-expression. First
of all, women have historically been lectured plenty on what is
"becoming" and those lectures can be reasonably interpreted as a
way to "keep women in their place." Even if this is not your
intention, your phrasing has an unfortunate resonance. This is
reinforced by the fact that you omit "gentleman, man or boy." This
can lead to the impression that you believe an attack is acceptable
from males, but not females -- the old double standard. Again,
this might not be your intention, but the interpretation is not
unreasonable.
Then there's the problem that some people, like myself, are not
terribly concerned with what is "becoming." Effective or appropriate,
perhaps, but not "becoming." Once it became apparent that you weren't
interested in communicating, I stopped trying. My more recent notes
have shifted from the approach of trying to understand your point
of view to dismantling the reasons behind your opinions. This was
not done to convince you to change your mind. It was obvious that
you weren't going to and of course the more aggressive approach
wouldn't do it. It was done because I disagree with you strongly
enough that I'm not willing to let such statements go unchallenged.
You have declined any systematic discussion of your opinions, choosing
to simply make assertions repeatedly. If I didn't agree the first
time, I'm not going to agree the second, third, etc. I can sort
of understand how your opinions might have been formed, but I find
them unrealistic. With your emphasis on "youthfulness," you seem
to have no value for seriousness. From your definitions, you're
dividing women into two extremes: the youthful and the "too mature."
That seems to ignore the complexity of the average human's character,
and I really don't understand how you can simplify things to such
an extent.
|
724.78 | yawn! | MCIS2::AKINS | A Rebel without a cause.... | Fri Apr 07 1989 04:17 | 36 |
| Well, I guess you just put me in my place....
Hey, my notes were never intended on slamming women (or as I like
to say girls.). From what I have read of your notes I get the
impression that you are most definatly a extream femanist. That
is just fine and I have no problems with that.
Now that you have defended your note 78.58 you know how it feels
to have you're reply taken in a different then you intended. I
suggested that your note was "blasting" me because I knew that you
didn't think it did. All my notes were not intended as an insult.
Your paranoia and quickness to accuse me of being disrespectful
to women makes me feel that you think that I am out just to anoy
you and the people who want to be called "women". I'm not...
really...I'm a nice guy....I really do not want to fight about
this. You have your opinions and I have mine. I won't call you
a girl and please stop accusing me of things I don't do.
I have stated my opinion before...
I'm just not a formal type of guy. To make a analogy....
I will wear a Black Tie and Tails to a formal event, but I'd rather
wear an old pair of Levi's and a Judas Priest T-Shirt.
I will use the word "women" but I like the word girl.
Now you said that you said that you don;t walk away from things
you feel strongly about. I don't either that is why I'm now walking
away from this...
Now why don't we just Value each others Differences and stop this
bickering. It's getting boring...
The Rebel
|
724.79 | Intermission | SUPER::REGNELL | Smile!--Payback is a MOTHER! | Fri Apr 07 1989 07:50 | 18 |
|
[ahem]
Since I am one of the women who is/was ready to
personally emasculate Bill [grin] for his attitude
and more importantly, his delivery of his opinion...
I would like to thank Chelsea for having at it with
such calm and logic.
AND....
Mr Aikins, I would like to compliment you on handling
yourself quite well under fire. Your reponse here
was much more reasoned and sensitive...maybe you
should try the approach more often.
Melinda
|
724.80 | | ACESMK::CHELSEA | Mostly harmless. | Fri Apr 07 1989 11:41 | 42 |
| Re: .78
>Well, I guess you just put me in my place....
I doubt it.
>From what I have read of your notes I get the impression that you
>are most definatly a extream femanist.
Then you haven't been paying attention in womannotes.
>Now that you have defended your note 78.58 you know how it feels
>to have you're reply taken in a different then you intended.
Oh, no, I knew that already.
Did you really consider that "blasting" or were you just setting
up a point?
>Your paranoia and quickness to accuse me of being disrespectful
>to women makes me feel that you think that I am out just to anoy
>you and the people who want to be called "women".
It took me from 29 March to 2 April to accuse you of being
disrespectful of women. Paranoia, of course, is a subjective
evaluation. Your guess about what I think isn't too far off, given
your definition of "woman." You have no respect for "chest-beating
feminists," you believe me to be one and you probably believe several
of the other participants to be so as well. So I don't think it's
too paranoid to suspect that you're being deliberately inflammatory.
Then you find out that your tactics have gotten you embroiled in
a heavy-duty controversy that you'd rather not have to deal with,
so you start looking for ways out.
>I'm just not a formal type of guy.
"Woman" is not a formal word.
>Now why don't we just Value each others Differences
Because, while I can understand stereotypes, I'm incapable of valuing
them.
|
724.81 | what I see | YODA::BARANSKI | Incorrugatible! | Fri Apr 07 1989 11:55 | 30 |
| 'you are most definatly a extream femanist. ... paranoia ...'
Alkthough I have never had the pleasure of meeting Chelsea in person, in notes I
have always known her to be concise and accurate, calm, methodical, and logical.
Certainly not paranoid. ... Well, maybe fanatical :-), but everyone has issues
that they are willing to push a little further. If you think Chelsea is an
extreme feminist, you don't know nothing.
Your notes, on the other hand, IMO, have been vague, inaccurate, slanted, and
dismissing of other people's notes. Not good communications *whatever* you are
trying to communicate. Congratulations, you are on the way to Noteriety with
the likes of EDP & Rik Sawyer (sorry ric! :-))
If it is any consolation, I've been right where you are right now... arguing
about whether or not calling a female 'girl' was appropriate or important. I
would guess that every man who appreciates the opposite sex as people in their
own right comes up against the problem eventually. Some accept the solution
easily, and some need to have it pounded into their heads and have every thing
explained to them. I am one of the later, as you are. But eventually I
realized that it doesn't matter what I want to call someone; it's common
courtesy to call people what they wish. Anything less then allowing people to
label themselves is a power trip.
Females don't seem to have to confront the problem... although they do
'educate' others. Men who don't care really won't get into the arguement and
don't appreciate females as people anyway.
So... just hang in there and keep your ears open...
Jim.
|
724.83 | AA time | SSDEVO::GALLUP | Hey Kids, rock and roll, rock on.... | Fri Apr 07 1989 12:28 | 56 |
|
>But eventually I
>realized that it doesn't matter what I want to call someone; it's common
>courtesy to call people what they wish.
Isn't that exactly what everyone has been saying all along!?!
For goodness sakes! Bill and I just have a different idea of
what we initially might call someone! Of COURSE if someone
is offended by it, we'll call them what they want! THAT,
people, has been stated, by Bill and by me, from the
beginning but you all seem to have disregarded that point!
I happen to agree with Bill in that I think its way silly to
get so worked up over a label! WE have the RIGHT to think
someone's silly for it! *BUT* have we ever told them they
*should* change? No!!!! Did they tell us to change? Yes!!!!
No matter how crass and abrasive Bill's notes were, I agreed
with every bit of it! It was quite obvious to me that Bill
was giving his opinions and his thoughts AND HIS DEFINITIONS!
But then again we all read what we WANT to read! Chelsea's
notes took the words Bill had said and twisted them to her
way of thinking. Take for example the quote about women
being boring. Chelsea took that to mean that Bill was
devaluing any of these women that felt that way. *I* took it to
mean that he would find someone with that attitude very
boring...so would I! That does NOT mean that woman is a
boring individual! JUST TO US!
Now the point I am going to bring up here (after I calm down
a bit) is! How the hell do Bill and I become pychic so that
we KNOW when someone wishes to be called something before we
call them that? Huh? As my default is different than most
all other people in this note, and I am uncomfortable
changing that default, just what do I do? Huh? Tell me how
to be pychic so that I don't offend....because its not my
intention to ever offend someone and I know its not Bill's
either.
Please enlighten me as to
1) Why you must analyze someone without just plan
asking them what they mean?
2) How I can become pychic without changing my default?
3) Did it ever occur to you that someone might be
offended by the word "woman"? How would you handle
that situation and what would you think, to
yourself about that person?
Eagerly awaiting and still very p*ssed.
kathy
|
724.84 | I think I smell a Rat. | MCIS2::AKINS | A Rebel without a cause.... | Fri Apr 07 1989 12:33 | 11 |
| Ms. Aitel and Moderators....
There is a policy of not copying any notes written from an author
without the author's permission. Please do not change my words.
I have dropped this subject because of 1)my lack of interest and
2) the constant attacks when I have tried to be congenial with my
notes. Please delete .81 for she has not only copied my note without
permission, but also changed my words. Now look who's calling sho
mature.
The Rebel
|
724.87 | zzzzzzzzzzzz. | MCIS2::AKINS | A Rebel without a cause.... | Fri Apr 07 1989 12:46 | 15 |
| Please...
For the 2345735 th time I AM NOT badmouthing women. Why do you
insist on it. If you don't liked to be called a "girl" then I won't
call you it. Alot of my friends (older and younger) would be insulted
if I refered to them as a "woman". They'd say "My grandmother is
a woman....". I never badmouth anyone for what sex, race or religion
they are. My beliefs are strongly based that all men (as in mankind
including women/girls/females) are created equal. As everyone who
knows me can say, I am not a bigot. (although I can do impressions
of Archie Bunker :-) ) I'm really tired of being acused of this,
nothing is further from the truth...
Please put the damn horse to rest....It's boring...
|
724.88 | Note write locked | VAXRT::CANNOY | Convictions cause convicts. | Fri Apr 07 1989 12:50 | 6 |
|
This note is now write locked. It may be reopened later, but it will
take a while since some of the moderators are not available to discuss
this with currently. We will let you know of our decision.
Tamzen, co-moderator
|