T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
60.1 | Here's one for you | SALEM::WALLACE | Future Mrs. Simpson | Tue Jul 19 1988 16:08 | 9 |
| Ellen,
I'll have to agree with you on this one. To me the term Lady shows
more respect. Someone can be a woman and be nothing of a Lady.
Without meaning to cause any type of an uproar, a Lady is more
polished than just being a woman.
-Michelle-
|
60.3 | To answer the survey.... | CUBFAN::STHILAIRE | as a group they're weird | Tue Jul 19 1988 16:22 | 13 |
| Even though I am fairly certain that most people who know me *would*
(if questioned) consider me to be "a woman of refinement and good
manners" (most of the time!), I have to say that I agree with the
neighbor. I would do not care for that particular usage of "lady"
described, where a man says something such as "that was a great
meal, lady". That usage *does* hold negative connotations for me
because to me that usage of lady is similar to "baby" or "dear"
or "darling" or "honey" or "tootsie" wherein a macho man thinks
of the woman as some sort of sex object. I prefer being called
by my first name.
Lorna
|
60.4 | old sayings cover everything | TOLKIN::DINAN | | Tue Jul 19 1988 17:01 | 5 |
|
it may be trite, but isn't the old saying - its not what you say
its how you say it.
bob
|
60.5 | lots better than some terms of endearment | NOETIC::KOLBE | The diletante debutante | Tue Jul 19 1988 17:06 | 11 |
|
Since my DCL prompt is Lady> I guess I better get in here and
vote.
I like the term lady, I was born a woman, I can become a lady.
Besides, (call me old fashioned, call me over the hill (sic))
I'm used to the term lady as an endearment. If a man was refering to
me as "his lady" I'd assume he was saying with a positive bent.
It sounds like your friend's SO is doing the same. I mean really,
some people even use nicknames like "stinky" to show fondness for
another. liesl, Lady of NOETIC.
|
60.6 | Just don't call me ma'am... | VALKYR::RUST | | Tue Jul 19 1988 17:10 | 26 |
| Definitely a sensitive area, here. Didn't we get into this in V1?
Oh, well - it makes for some lovely arguments.
In general, I'd say that if someone you care about uses a term that you
find objectionable, it seems reasonable to ask him to change it;
however, it also seems reasonable to accept his explanation of what he
means by it, and to take it as it is intended.
Now, if a stranger on the street says, "Hey, lady!" it has a different
meaning (to me) than if someone I care about says it. If the same
stranger says, "Hey, woman!" I think I'd find it even more offensive;
at least "lady," even if said sarcastically, is an attempt at a
title. "Hey, woman!" sounds like someone addressing the serving
wench.
To take a slightly different tack, if someone says "Act like a lady,"
that *really* burns me, as it sounds like the speaker is telling me
that his/her standards are higher than - rather than simply different
from - my own. But "Act like a woman!" is a perfectly reasonable
injunction (assuming it is intended to mean, "Act like a responsible,
self-respecting human being," which is also what I would prefer to
think "Act like a man" means).
So, girlie, whaddya think of that? :-)
-b
|
60.7 | | AWARD2::HARMON | | Tue Jul 19 1988 17:42 | 8 |
| I agree that "lady" would be a term of endearment in this case.
It would also depend on how it was said. A former SO would call
me "lady" and I knew it was his way expressing he cared....woman
just wouldn't fit and, with all that's been said, written and debated
about the term "girl".............
P.
|
60.8 | :-) | CUBFAN::STHILAIRE | as a group they're weird | Tue Jul 19 1988 17:51 | 2 |
| Whatever you *gals* decide is fine with me!
|
60.9 | sounds okay this time | DOODAH::RANDALL | Bonnie Randall Schutzman | Tue Jul 19 1988 17:57 | 5 |
| In general I don't like being referred to as a lady -- the
inaccuracy of it boggles the mind -- but this particular mode
of address doesn't bother me.
--bonnie, the unrefined feisty bitch
|
60.10 | Noun or address? | MOIRA::FAIMAN | A goblet, a goblet, yea, even a hoop | Tue Jul 19 1988 18:16 | 13 |
| I think that as a noun, a "woman" is simply a female person who is
no longer a child, while a "lady" is a "woman of refinement...".
However, as a form of address, "lady" is distinctly respectful (I
imagine the auto mechanic talking down to the housewife who can't
comprehend a carburetor -- "Look lady, would you make up your
mind?"), while "woman" is extremely insulting ("Knock it off,
woman."
Of course, with a proper name after it, "lady" designates a member
of the British nobility.
-Neil
|
60.11 | | COGMK::CHELSEA | Mostly harmless. | Tue Jul 19 1988 18:39 | 11 |
| Connotations are so much fun. What do they mean to me?
A lady is a courteous woman, with connotations of refinement or
gentility. If anything, it connotes a discerning intellect, as
befits someone of good taste. A woman is an adult female.
When I was little, my mother told me to use "woman" as the generic
("That lady over there" became "That woman over there") because
not all women were ladies. I haven't always done that, speech patterns
being difficult to change, but I almost always think of that when
I say "lady."
|
60.12 | should I start jumping up and down? | YODA::BARANSKI | The far end of the bell curve | Tue Jul 19 1988 18:40 | 6 |
| oddly enough, I get called 'babe', 'dear'... etc by women a lot more then I ever
address women in that manner (having been taught the error of my ways :-)).
Should I be offended? :-)
JMB
|
60.13 | Intentionally left blank for future use. | SALEM::AMARTIN | My AHDEDAHZZ REmix, by uLtRaVeRsE | Wed Jul 20 1988 03:41 | 23 |
| DArn Jim, that was MY question.....
Honestly, Mel calls me "hon" or "babe" or "sweety" etc, and I her.
I see nothing wrong with it.
I think someone said it already, about how you say it.
I DO have a problem with this "lady" stuff though.
I am a security officer, when a woman enters/leaves the facility
I say things to the extent of "Have a nice day maam", or "Do you
need some assistance Maam".
Now, I see that a few of you do notlike the name "maam", but how
would you react to something like, "Have a nice day lady", or "do
you need any assistance woman?"
I tend to think that these sound awful rude, and if I WERE a woman
I would be offended by those.
Jes wonderin'.
|
60.14 | | AKOV11::BOYAJIAN | Copyright � 1953 | Wed Jul 20 1988 04:04 | 15 |
| I have to agree with most of the folks here. Whether "lady" is
perceived as positive or negative depends a lot on context and
intent. It seems clear to me that your friend's SO's intent is
respectful, though personally speaking, I find the use of it
rather awkward-sounding (though if he said "milady" instead, it
would sound perfectly natural).
Still, if she is uncomfortable with it, that's her perogative,
and she would not be out of line asking him to stop using it.
If she doesn't want to hurt his feelings, she could always tell
him that she finds such an address too formal, much in the same
way that I feel uncomfortable when people refer to me as "Mr.
Boyajian" rather than "Jerry".
--- jerry
|
60.15 | :-) | SPMFG1::CHARBONND | I get the top | Wed Jul 20 1988 07:12 | 4 |
| re .14 "milady" ??? Only place I ever encountered that was
in 'The Three Musketeers'.
|
60.16 | smile when you say that, podner | MOSAIC::LARUE | sometimes a strange notion | Wed Jul 20 1988 08:10 | 6 |
| I would rather be called by my name. But in terms of the question
asked, any sentance that starts "Look, lady..." is going to push
my buttons. It's entirely the context, the formality of the occasion
and the delivery that counts with me.
Dondi
|
60.17 | You can call me Ray... | ULTRA::ZURKO | UI:Where the rubber meets the road | Wed Jul 20 1988 09:19 | 3 |
| As with Bonnie RS, while lady isn't me, it might be you. I don't use either
'lady' or 'gentleman' with people I am close to. Sounds too formal.
Mez
|
60.19 | from the peanut gallery | TSG::SULLIVAN | Karen - 296-5616 | Wed Jul 20 1988 10:27 | 27 |
| RE: .13
How do you greet the men? Why don't you just
say "Have a nice day.", without any gender reference?
RE: the topic
If it bothers your friend it bothers her, so she'd better
tell her SO. You can't build a relationship if everytime he
casually uses "lady" you cringe.
Personally, I'll accept just about anything when it is used
as a term of endearment. However, I don't like being
referred to as woman or lady. You might as well use "hey
you!" if you have to use anything. I am "a woman" over
being "a lady". To me "a woman" is a muture adult female.
"A lady" carries a lot of baggage with her, she has to be
nice all the time, she probably lets men rule her life. "A
lady" (to me) connotes a shallow personality where rules and
regulations mean more than the people involved.
"A lady" crosses her legs (or should I say limbs?) when she
sits - and then cuts off her circulation to them. A woman
sits comfortably and even puts her feet up if she'd like.
...Karen
(an intelligent, caring and usually polite woman :-))
|
60.20 | Don't call me late for meals. | OURVAX::JEFFRIES | the best is better | Wed Jul 20 1988 10:35 | 16 |
| Ideally, I like to be called by my first name, but everyone out
there doesn't know what it is and I don't were a big name tag sooooo
I say "call me anything except late for meals". :-)
Seriously, I work in retail and have been called Mame, lady, hey
you, you hoo, girl and girlie. When I am in a situation like that
I respond to all of them, I cannot and will not try to train the
public to my preferences. Most of these people will never interact
with me again, the ones that are regular customers have learned
my name and address me by name.
There is a difference in being called a lady and being called lady.
With language evolving the way it does around common usage, unless
we start in our elementary schools teaching the young, the future
generations of females are going to have a lot more to be concerned
about than whether they are called women or ladys.
|
60.21 | If younger than 40... | HYEND::JRHODES | | Wed Jul 20 1988 11:24 | 5 |
|
If dealing with strangers I prefer to be called Miss or Ms. rather
than Ma'am. I always think of Ma'am as an older woman.
How do you feel about these terms?
|
60.22 | etiquette | RAINBO::IANNUZZO | Catherine T. | Wed Jul 20 1988 11:27 | 38 |
| Etiquette note, without political significance:
"Ma'am" is always a correct mode of address for a woman whom one does not
know. You can properly call the Queen of England "Ma'am".
"Sir" is always a correct mode of address for a man whom one does not know.
English is short on honorifics, and has borrowed its from French (madame
et monsieur -- my lady and my lord). At one time these were only
applicable to persons of nobility, but in these democratic times
everyone is entitled to them.
Note the degeneration of the perfectly respectable title "Madam" into
meaning the keeper of a brothel (so that one is safest using the more
common contraction, "Ma'am"). It is also interesting to note how other
perfectly respected titles of courtesy such as "Mistress" and its
contraction and abbreviation "Mrs." have come to signify women in
various states of sexual servitude to men, rather than simply mature
female members of society. The terms "Sir" and "Mister" do not seem to
have been subject to these indignities.
The practice of calling women and men "ladies and gentlemen" is also a
gesture of democratic inclusion in the privileges of nobility. It is
interesting that much of the controvery about the use of the term "lady"
occurs because its connotations have become trivial and demeaning.
The term no longer implies a woman of social significance, grace, and
power -- merely someone whose sensibilities will be offended by vulgar
language and who crosses her legs decorously. She is someone who could
never change a flat tire herself. The idea of "gentlemen" has not been
subject to the same trivialization. It still connotes generosity of
spirit and restrained strength -- after all, he is the one who will
remove his jacket and change the tire for the lady.
I find it interesting that our language continues to take away words
that allow the idea of dignity, power, and womanhood to reside in the
same concept.
[Maybe there was some political significance to that after all.]
|
60.23 | Further Clarification | BRAT::GERMANN | | Wed Jul 20 1988 12:52 | 18 |
| Just to clarify some points::::
First, Matt uses the term "lady" as a form of endearment.
Second, Anne did talk with him about her feelings - I can't imagine
her NOT doing so. She didn't indicate his response so I can't offer
that piece of info.
Third, on my part, I did not mean that "woman" connotes a cold person,
but rather that the word "woman" is a cold word to me - one without
life. I think someone else said it - a female - nothing more.
This has been interesting. I agree that if it bothers her, then
that is fine and she should act on that. This wasn't meant as a
way to confirm either her or my feelings - just a way to find out
how others feel.
Thanks -- Ellen
|
60.24 | I ain't no lady... | METOO::LEEDBERG | | Wed Jul 20 1988 13:10 | 28 |
|
Back in V1 I entered a note entitled "Don't call me Girl" and my
feelings have not changed but gotten stronger about it.
I perfer people to use my first name and not honey, babe, sweetie
or whatever when addressing me NO MATTER what the circumstance.
I happen to really like my name and like to hear others (especially
people I really care about) say it. The only exceptions are my
son and daughter - they call me Mom or Mommy or sometimes Ma.
It maybe from the fact that a woman is seen by SOME men as
interchangeable with any other woman so first names are not used
but terms that can apply to another are used. Now not all men think
this way but I have met enough to be wary of men who do not use
my first name.
_peggy
(-)
|
My family name came from my father,
My first name is who I am,
If you want to know me better
When you talk to me use my name.
|
60.25 | intimacy and identity | DOODAH::RANDALL | Bonnie Randall Schutzman | Wed Jul 20 1988 13:31 | 20 |
| re: .24
That's very true, Peggy, but on the other hand it's natural to
want to have a special name for a person who's special in your
life. You don't always want to call him or her by the same name
everybody else uses because you aren't "everybody else." It
indicates the intimicy of the relationship, not the identity of
the person being addressed.
Some people invent cute names, or give new meanings to ordinarily
derogatory ones. [A friend calls her very skinny husband "Fatso"
when nobody's listening...] Others make use of the existing
ones like lady, babe, honey. You have to know the people involved
to know whether the woman in question is being belittled.
But that doubles the insult of having a stranger refer to you as
"honey" or "Look, lady," or whatever. It's an intimacy they're
not entitled to.
--bonnie
|
60.26 | What If Someone Doesn't Know You? | FDCV16::ROSS | | Wed Jul 20 1988 14:26 | 12 |
| RE: .24
Peggy, your preference to having your first named used is a valid
one for you.
That works fine for people who, indeed, know your name *is*
Peggy Leedberg.
For those who do not know you at all, how do you prefer being
addressed: Ma'am, Madam, Hey You.......?
Alan
|
60.27 | | VLNVAX::OSTIGUY | | Wed Jul 20 1988 14:34 | 9 |
| To me, Lady (said the way Mat does) is said with affection. Lady
sounds classy to me. Like someone else said, one is born a woman
and then becomes a lady.
If Anne is bothered by this she should say so. I wouldn't let
something like this get in the way of a good relationship.
Anna
|
60.28 | As If You Had Never Met... | CSC32::JOHNS | A son: Evan, born 3-11 @8lbs, 12 oz | Wed Jul 20 1988 14:42 | 14 |
| "Lady" to me is not an endearment. If I was told, "That was a great meal,
lady" by someone I know I would just stare at them, and figure that they were
clowning around. If told that by a stranger then I would think them of lower
class (than I). I would expect that type of talk from a (sorry folks) truck
driver. If someone wants to refer to me when talking to someone else, then I
like the term, as in "Hand the lady your package, Johnny". If someone is
speaking directly to me, then I would expect "That was a great meal, Carol/Ms.
Johns/ Ma'am". I do agree that I would not be offended by a loved one if that
person used "milady" and smiled.
I keep thinking about this. I can only see using "lady" that way when teasing,
as in saying to your SO, "Hey lady, you're kinda cute. Wanna have dinner
with me tonight?"
Carol
|
60.29 | "That was a great dinner, gentleman????" | METOO::LEEDBERG | | Wed Jul 20 1988 17:45 | 19 |
|
Someone already asked this - How do you address a male who's name
you do not know?
I would expect whoever I am intimate with to use my first name or
an AGREEDED upon pet name (but I really can not think of one).
Except when the intent is clearly to be silly.
_peggy
(-)
|
I use Sir and Ma'am for individuals I do not
know. I use first names or just last names
or initials for everyone else except when being
really silly.
|
60.30 | | YODA::BARANSKI | The far end of the bell curve | Wed Jul 20 1988 18:05 | 8 |
| "It maybe from the fact that a woman is seen by SOME men as interchangeable with
any other woman so first names are not used but terms that can apply to another
are used."
How interesting... I known several women who for various reasons prefered to
use generic address, 'dear' when speaking to me.
JMB
|
60.31 | Old Habits... | FRAGLE::TATISTCHEFF | Lee T | Wed Jul 20 1988 18:30 | 11 |
| re .30
ahem, well I'm one of the women who uses "sweetie" and "dear" because
otherwise I tend to use the wrong name. While any current is certainly
an individual, many, many names pop into my mouth when I seek the
name for "loved one".
Of course I and my brothers were identified as "Leenicktimjohnbillfrank"
our entire childhood, and I only have two brothers...
lt
|
60.33 | | MEIS::GORDON | The pirates of Stone County Road | Wed Jul 20 1988 19:44 | 27 |
| [carefully wash foot just in case...]
I had a friend in college who called her mother "Lady" and there
was no question that it carried a lot of warmth and love. She even
referred to her in the third person that way - I'd get letters that
said "Lady says 'Hi'."
I used sir and ma'am casually when I worked in industries that
required that I had public contact. At this stage in life, I use "sir"
when I believe someone male deserves my respect and "ma'am" for
females. I do not grant the titles lightly, and certainly not for
mere rank. The last person I remember addressing as "sir" was the
president of my last company. "Mr. S" as he was known in conversation,
could easily have been first name basis, but I respected him enough
to use the title. (I left the company over 2 years ago...)
I'm likely to use "Lady" for a woman who's important to me.
"Howya doin' Pretty Lady?" is a very likely greeting from me if
I haven't seen you in a while.
With SO's, I tend to have a pet name (there's a note on that
either in V1 or Human Relations) that I use. Also, the form of
"Hey lady, haven't I seen you here before..." banter occurs.
Well, I think I've kept my foot out so far, so time to quit.
--Doug
|
60.34 | | AKOV11::BOYAJIAN | Copyright � 1953 | Thu Jul 21 1988 03:49 | 11 |
| re:.31
Yeah, that too. Remembering my SO's names was complicated by the
fact that among them were two Karen's, one Kathy, and a Carol.
The first syllable was no problem -- it was the second that I
would fumble on.
And my mother tends to address me and each of my two nephews as
"Jerry_Eric_Chris_Whichever_Kid_You_Are".
--- jerry
|
60.35 | my mother-in-law too | DOODAH::RANDALL | Bonnie Randall Schutzman | Thu Jul 21 1988 09:20 | 10 |
| My mother-in-law is a honey-dear person, and it used to annoy the
heck out of me until I figured out that she couldn't even keep her
own kids straight. Neil and his brother Lee look a lot alike now
that they're grown, and with a daughter-in-law and a granddaughter
both named Kathy, she doesn't have a prayer of remembering what
name goes with which person.
Though she does a great job with the grandchildren.
--bonnie
|
60.36 | arf | SWSNOD::DALY | Serendipity 'R' us | Thu Jul 21 1988 09:45 | 13 |
| RE: .35
My mother-in-law is a honey-dear person, too. All things considered,
I'd rather have it that way, since half the time when she does call
me a name, it's her _dog's_ name. Yes. You read that right. Her
dog's name is Marcy. Mine is Marion. For some reason she has been
known to call me Marcy. When she does it, she doesn't even realize
what she has done. Nobody has ever called it to her attention.
We all just sort of stuff our fists in our mouths to stifle the
snickers. All in all, though, she is a really nice (though somewhat
dippy) lady.
Marion
|
60.37 | Just out of "girlhood" | THRUST::CARROLL | Sundae girl | Thu Jul 21 1988 09:56 | 16 |
| Well, I have been called "girl" and "miss" so long (not in a deragatory
way, but because I was one - I'm only 20 now) that I fairly glow
when strangers call me *any* name that implies age and maturity,
eg: Lady, Woman, Ma'am, etc... (For my 20th birthday, my father
send me a card listing the ways you could tell you weren't a kid
anymore, and one was "When teenage boys call you 'Ma'am'".)
With people I know, I prefer woman, because, as many people have
mentioned, "Lady" carries a lot of baggage. I picture a "lady"
as being someone intelligent and refined, and being called "lady"
puts some sort of burden on me to conform to that image. (As anyone
who has met me could tell you, I am not overly concerned with social
protocol...)
Diana_Who_Is_Still_More_Comfortable_With_Girl_(Until_She_Graduates)
|
60.38 | baggage | DOODAH::RANDALL | Bonnie Randall Schutzman | Thu Jul 21 1988 11:07 | 11 |
| > "Lady" carries a lot of baggage...
Hey, I've got it!
We can all be bag ladies!
Seriously, if "lady" indicates refinement and such, why are the
homeless women on the street called "bag ladies" instead of "bag
women"?
--bonnie
|
60.39 | Small foolish digression. . . | HANDY::MALLETT | Situation hopeless but not serious | Thu Jul 21 1988 14:43 | 21 |
| re: .37
� . . .I fairly glow when strangers call me *any* name that
� implies age and maturity. . .
Several "thoughts" come to mind.
One is "Ooooo - that smarts." (followed by whimpers of longing -
how long has it been since I've been carded? And why do some people
call me "Mr.", like I'm a grown-up or something?) Call me a kid
and you can have my life savings and first-born child. . .
Another: would I get on your extra-good side Diana, if I called
you up and, in my best Joe Cool voice said, "Hi, Diana. How're ya
doin' you old crone?" Uh, Diana? Hello? Hello? Hmmm. . .guess
this means I'm back in the running for the Golden Bozo awards. . .
Hey, if I can't have youth, I'll settle for immaturity. . .
Steve (the fossilized foole)
|
60.40 | | CASV02::AUSTIN | Have a nice day...Somewhere else! | Fri Jul 22 1988 13:33 | 9 |
| re .38
Good point...
I would much rather have an SO say "That was some dinner Lady" than
"that was some dinner Woman". Or "See you tomorrow Lady" rather
than "see you tomorrow Woman". But to each his own.
Tanya
|
60.42 | Class Act | HENRYY::HASLAM_BA | | Fri Jul 22 1988 14:13 | 8 |
| Everyone has made good points. For myself, I consider the context
in which the comment was made to be more important that the terminology
since society has played havoc about what is acceptable and probably
will continue to do so for many years yet. When it comes to "lady"
vs. "woman", let me tell you the enscription I want on my tombstone,
"The lady had class."
Barb
|
60.43 | "Hey you!" is fine by me... | DLOACT::RESENDEP | following the yellow brick road... | Fri Jul 22 1988 15:56 | 16 |
| I can hardly think of a higher compliment that for someone to say
to me "You're a real lady." If someone says "Hey, lady, you forgot
your change," it obviously isn't meant in the same way but it doesn't
particularly bother me. In that sense, I take the word "lady" to
be synonymous with "woman" or "person." If my husband says I'm
his lady, I beam all over.
I ABHOR being called a girl or, even worse, "gal". By anyone.
Particularly in a business relationship (yes, it does happen even
at Digital), but really anywhere, anytime, by anyone.
And no one except my daddy and my husband ever have permission to
use honey, sugar, or any of that stuff on me. Those two can use
all the sickeningly sweet names they want, and I love it!
Pat
|
60.44 | My Mother raised me to be a lady, but . . . | SMEGIT::WHITE | Natural Woman | Mon Jul 25 1988 18:39 | 47 |
|
now I am a real woman!!
As a little girl I wanted to be a lady. A lady was always gracious
and kind, never did embarassing things in public, and always knew the
correct behaviour. A lady was not necessarily intelligent, but she
was always charming. As I was learning the rules, I gradually realized
that being a lady meant suppressing a large part of my natural
personality.
Now, some of the rules were part of the civilizing of the natural
little savage who always wants to go first and take the largest piece
of cake. But the rules for lady went much further. I was constantly
being told that my gestures were too exhuberant, my voice too noisy,
my enthusiasm too unrestrained. Even my hobbies were unladylike. A
lady does not talk about biology in public. "Lady" was also used in
my family to discreetly despise women who did not come from our
background. Entire ethnic groups were not ladies and gentlemen.
My emotional rejection of the word "lady" came when I awakened from
the great deception "if you behave like a lady, men will behave like
gentlemen". My guilt feelings about unpleasant incidents were increased
by the thought that if I had somehow been more proper and "ladylike",
it would not have happened. Actually, ladylike behavior may make the
situation worse, by encouraging the man to believe there will be no
retaliation. I should have been taught to scream, hit, and tell.
So,.. I no longer think of myself as a lady, even though I know which
fork to use and still give up my seat to the elderly. I am glad to
be a whole woman. I can feel strong emotions, fix my own plumbing,
wear gaudy colors, talk about what interests me, and am learning to
fight back when attacked. Being a woman connects me with other women,
being a lady set me apart.
In public places, I am usually offended by sentences that start "Hey,
lady" because they usually are completed in a sarcastic or insulting
manner. Some men use "hey, lady" to imply ignorance of things that
"men " know like how the car works. I do not object to being referred
to in the third person as lady, "Say thank you to the nice lady".
"Miss" or "Ma'am" are perfectly ok for direct address from sales clerks,
and other strangers.
I would probably be uncomfortable with "lady" used as a term of
endearment, but would have no trouble explaining this to my SO.
Some uses of "lady" in very silly contexts, especially from women
and relatives(of all genders), don't bother me at all.
|
60.45 | look over your shoulder before you say that! | YODA::BARANSKI | The far end of the bell curve | Mon Jul 25 1988 21:52 | 6 |
| "I can ... fix my own plumbing ..."
Shhh! I hope you aren't in MA. In MA, *nobody*, man or woman can fix their own
plumbing! Keep it quiet, or the plumbing police will get you!
JMB :-)
|
60.46 | Re: .44 | AQUA::WALKER | | Tue Jul 26 1988 10:09 | 1 |
| Terrific! Real! Right on!
|
60.47 | | CSSE32::PHILPOTT | The Colonel | Tue Jul 26 1988 11:39 | 23 |
|
I've been away from this file for a while, and I read .0 with a
certain feeling of deja vu. It reminded me of the "don't call me
girl" note of the previous incarnation of this file.
Why? well when used in the way shown in .0 I see little
difference between "hey, lady!" and "hey, girl!" - they both seem
to be (subconscious?) put downs.
A Lady is a member of the [British and some other] aristocracy.
It denotes nothing else, other than an accident of birth or
marriage.
A lady on the other hand is a woman who displays the carriage and
manners that one associates (rightly or wrongly) with the gentry
and aristocracy. Used in the third person ("she is quite a
lady!") it is nothing but a compliment. However used as a direct
means of address it is a cynical and inappropriate term: at best
a sarcastic reference to the lack of the characteristics implied
by adjectival use.
/. Ian .\
|
60.48 | this really says it for me | PHAROS::SULLIVAN | Lotsa iced tea & no deep thinkin' | Tue Jul 26 1988 14:29 | 9 |
|
re .44
>> Being a woman connects me with other women,
>> being a lady set me apart.
I think this sentence so beautifully addresses the issue, that I
just wanted to repost it here. Thank you.
Justine
|
60.50 | | VALKYR::RUST | | Tue Jul 26 1988 15:11 | 10 |
| Re .49 (re .44):
Now, now. The author of .44 isn't encouraging women to forsake
civility; she clearly expressed the difference between civilized
behavior and the excessive level of "ladylike" behavior that (used to
be?) required to earn that honorific. In fact, that reply was the
best-expressed discussion of the "lady" vs. "woman" question that I've
seen, and sums up my feelings pretty well.
-b
|
60.51 | | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Tue Jul 26 1988 17:56 | 7 |
| I agree: .44 says it perfectly! I've been wracking my brain to come
up with a way to express this....now I can stop...Pat already did...
Thanks, Pat
Dawn
|
60.52 | egalite... | DECWET::JWHITE | rule #1 | Tue Jul 26 1988 21:50 | 4 |
|
re:.49
what's so good about elites setting policy?
|
60.54 | | MOSAIC::IANNUZZO | Catherine T. | Wed Jul 27 1988 20:30 | 8 |
|
~--e--~ Eagles_Suggest_All_Opportunity_Comes_Sooner_2_Nicer_Persons
_and_That_Feminists_Would_Do_Better_2_Appear_"Professional"
I find it interesting that it seems to be assumed that feminists appear
"unprofessional" and are not "nicer persons". I guess no ladies or men
must have interviewed for my job or my boss would never have hired such
a nasty, unprofessional woman as myself.
|
60.56 | Just my opinion. | KELVIN::WHARTON | | Wed Jul 27 1988 21:23 | 3 |
| Lady is to gentleman as woman is to man.
I hate lady. It is too stuffy. Give me woman.
|
60.57 | but could a lady get the facilities job? | TSG::SULLIVAN | Karen - 296-5616 | Thu Jul 28 1988 17:25 | 11 |
| RE: .53
Eagles, you're using your definition of lady and woman
to prove your point. The problem is we're arguing
definition, so you can't use definition to prove definition.
All things being equal, the intelligent, experienced,
polite person will get the job. The employer will
not care if she holds up her pinky when she drinks her tea.
...Karen
|
60.58 | | SPMFG1::CHARBONND | I get the top | Fri Jul 29 1988 08:28 | 12 |
| re .57 >could a lady get a facilities job ?
Yes. The real trick is to be treated like a lady on the job.
My definition ? A lady is a person who insists on being treated
like a lady.
About "lady" being confining. It isn't to keep one from "letting
their hair down". The difference is that a lady (or gentleman)
knows *when* the letting down of hair is appropriate behavior.
Dana
|
60.59 | Dame used to be a compliment | ULTRA::WITTENBERG | Secure Systems for Insecure People | Fri Jul 29 1988 17:36 | 31 |
| This discussion seems to reappear periodically. It's interesting
to note that most words referring to female humans eventually
become offensive. My (inadequate) desk dictionary defines "Dame"
as: A mature woman, a title conferred on women, equivalent to that
of knight. Many women in this file now find "dame" offensive.
What seems to be happening is that any term used for a group that
society does not favor eventually becomes offensive. This is most
obvious in the terms for people with dark skin, who have gone
through colored people, negros, blacks, and people of color. Each
term was at one point the preferred term by the group described,
and became, in its turn, offensive. I don't know what the next
term will be, but it will turn up in 5 to 10 years.
A problem with this is that it results in a less interesting
language. One of the best things about English is its many words
that differ only subtly. I can refer to male humans as boys, men,
gentlemen, guys, or fellows, each with implying a different
relationship or group. For females, the only word I can use
without causing offense is "women". The result is dulling English
from a sharp tool to a blunt instrument. If I beleived that this
would really improve the position of women I could go along, but I
think that it's essentially silly. I fully expect woman to be
offensive (replaced by womyn perhaps?) relatively soon.
I don't know what can be done, as I believe that this process will
happen to any word used to describe a group that isn't dominant in
the society. I suppose we'll just change words every few years
rather than attacking the larger problems.
--David
|
60.60 | ��s offereode; �isses swa m�g: that was overcome; this also may | AITG::INSINGA | Aron K. Insinga | Mon Aug 01 1988 00:12 | 32 |
| Re: .59
(Warning: the following is supported only by cobwebbed memory and something
that is beginning to sound like an epidemic: a desktop dictionary. Can't
we get an OED for every plant, and keep it someplace where we can access it
during normal noting hours? :-)
This is an old problem for English. In particular, "wench" and "knave"� were
nice�, Old English words for "child" and "boy" [from the American Heritage
Dictionary, Office Edition, etymologies] but when the Normans conquered
England, they used the Old English terms, to denote Anglo-Saxons, in a quite
different social context (guess who was 1-up and who was 1-down), and the words
adopted their still-current sexual/class meanings.
Maybe in the next generation, David, people will demand to be called just
"people". First we lose inflections, then strong verbs, then...?
�Well, they were spelled a *little* differently, but not much.
�I've read "Sermo Lupo ad Anglos quando Dani maxime pesecuti sunt eos, quod
fuit anno milessimo .xiv." (well, I probably blew the endings; it's "Sermon by
Wulf[stan] to the English when the Danes were greatly persecuting them, which
was in the year 1014") a long, detailed, and racy sermon in Old English about
the evil� going on in England, which (of course!!!) was why the Vikings (who were
piously worshiping _their_ gods!) were winning, so straighten up quickly before
the end of the world arrives at the millenium -- anyway, so I've seen the
not-so-nice Old English words, too, and I don't remember these being among
them. (Archbishop Wulfstan was right, too; the world ended in 1066, at the
hands of the descendents of Vikings who had settled down in France... :-)
�As I remember, in most of these deeds, women were the victims. I think that
Iceland was the best place in Europe for women's rights during the "dark ages."
|
60.61 | Definitions Please | RUTLND::KUPTON | Goin' For The Top | Mon Aug 01 1988 08:41 | 28 |
| I think too often we become thin-skinned. When we consider the
word "lady" it can refer to the "grand lady", "old lady", Hey, lady,
and of course, "That Lady". It's the use of the word and its intonation
that raises the hackles. The same can be said for "boy". I'd venture
few people would say "hey boy, come here", to a black man almost
anywhere, but wouldn't hesitate to say "that's my boy" when puffing
out their chests.
The word "feminist" is hard one for me to grasp, because different
writers use it to mean different things. Some refer to feminist
as meaning female or female oriented, others use it to describe
hard line revolutionary groups, still others mean it to a manner
of behavior, excluding militaristic and subversive, by a women as
a movement to gain equality in all areas of society. Some women
don't like to be described as feminist, others feel comfortable with
the description.
I'd just like to see words used as they are intended by the
user, and not have everyone read into them as meaning something
else. When I open the door for my wife and other women and I say
"after you, ladies", I'm not being derogatory, rather, I consider
it to be complimentary. On the other hand when I've opened the door
for some females as a courtesy, I've been hit with, "I don't need
a man to open the door for me".
So I get very confused in what the lastest meaning of a word
may be and use the standard words that I was taught to be gentlemenly
in each circumstance and hope that I don't offend.
Ken
|
60.62 | I'm Obliging | 24994::ROSS | | Mon Aug 01 1988 10:10 | 13 |
| RE: .61
> On the other hand when I've opened the door
> for some females as a courtesy, I've been hit with, "I don't need
> a man to open the door for me".
When I've gotten this reaction from some women, my immediate response
is to let go of the door.
Sometimes I'm lucky: the door is heavy and quick moving, and gets
'em in the kneecaps.
Alan
|
60.64 | | MEWVAX::AUGUSTINE | Purple power! | Mon Aug 01 1988 11:11 | 20 |
| re: .61 by RUTLND::KUPTON
> I think too often we become thin-skinned.
Ken,
This is an interesting comment. Are you saying that some women are
thin-skinned because they don't like to be called "ladies"? If I'm
reading your note as you intended, please take a minute to think about
what's transpired. Some women have said that they like the term "lady".
Others have said that they don't. Your note implies that you don't care
whether people like the term or not -- you intend to continue using it.
Now, if you expressed a dislike for brussel sprouts, how would you feel
if someone said "It's just when they're poorly cooked that you feel
nauseated" and put a huge dollop on your plate?
Liz
p.s. I don't know when you'd say "that's my boy" (maybe about your
son?) but I can't at the moment think of an occasion when I'd use
that expression.
|
60.65 | Let's call the whole thing off? | PNEUMA::SULLIVAN | Lotsa iced tea & no deep thinkin' | Mon Aug 01 1988 11:40 | 27 |
|
First of all, I feel compelled to say that whenever a man or woman
opens or holds open a door for me, I generally walk through and
say, "Thank you." If I get to a door first, I generally open it
and hold it open for the person (male or female) who is behind me
or next to me. I consider this to be a matter of human courtesy,
and it doesn't strike me as a particularly feminist issue. Though
I will admit that it makes me a little uncomfortable if a man goes
out of his way (like by crossing in front of me or by running ahead
of me) to open the door, but if he does, I still walk through, and
I still say thank you.
To those of you who use the word lady. What if you and I were working
together (say, in the same group, or on a project), and I told you
that I was uncomfortable with your use of the word lady. Would you
keep using it in my presence? Would you think I was rude, pushy?
Would you appreciate the feedback? I'd like to know because sometimes
this issue comes up for me, and I'd like to know how it feels to
someone I may confront. By the way, I usually *don't* confront
people unless I feel personally close to them. (But if someone
called me honey or dear, I probably would say something.) Usually if
someone uses the word lady or girl, I make it a point to use
the word woman several times in the next few sentences, and usually
the person also uses the word woman, at least in my presence.
Justine
|
60.66 | What Molehills Can Become Mountains Today? | FDCV03::ROSS | | Mon Aug 01 1988 12:17 | 35 |
| RE: .64
Liz, I think that the issue comes down to the fact that some people
(male or female) are always going to find something offensive about
the words or actions of somebody else, no matter how innocent the
intent of the perceived offender.
Yes, if a woman were to say to me that she did not like me to refer
to her as a lady, then in a one-to-one conversation, I would refer
to her as a woman, even if I thought the word "lady" was a sign
of respect.
However, if this woman was part of a larger group of females I was
addressing, and I normally would use the word "ladies" in such a
setting, knowing that the other women thought that to be an acceptable
word, I would continue to use ladies. If she's offended, tough. Then
it becomes her problem, not mine. (I can see it now: off she goes
to Personnel, filing a complaint about the denigrating "L" word.)
As an aside, in either this, or the Note about "Girl vs. Woman",
someone said that the word "Ma'am" is always an acceptable and
proper form of address when speaking to a woman.
There has been a law suit brought by a male student in a woman's
study class at a college in (I think, Pennsylvania), who was kicked
out of the class by his instructess after this reported exchange:
He: "Ma'am, I don't agree with your interpretation".
She: "I'm too young (she's 24 or 25) to be called Ma'am".
He: "What do you want me to call you? Sir?"
Alan
|
60.67 | :-) | HEFTY::CHARBONND | I get the top | Mon Aug 01 1988 14:13 | 3 |
| re .66 >instructress
??
|
60.68 | | RUTLND::KUPTON | Goin' For The Top | Mon Aug 01 1988 15:16 | 27 |
| re:64
I guess I should clarify. I truly meant we, when I talked about
being thin skinned. And I guess it's true. Everyone gets so darn
defensive about things.
What I allude to is that when talking in a group and the
conversation is lively etc., if I don't weigh evry word I say prior
to using it. I may say I went out with the boys the other night
or my wife went out with the ladies or the girls. I don't mean to
insult or antagonize anyone. But it really angers me when someone
gets all bent and ices over while saying "I am not a girl, I'm a
woman". It totally destroys the atmosphere of the conversation and
everyone tenses up. I can't picture myself saying " my wife went
out with the females or the women the other night." To some (male
and female) certain words resurect bad memories or conger up bad
images. Most of us try not to hurt or insult either the same or
opposite gender in normal conversation, at least I try not to, but
there is no guarantee that what doesn't irritate you might not irritate
some one else.
As to "that's my boy". The last thing my father said to my mother
and brother before he died was, "I'll never see my boy again.".
I was 22 years old, in my 5th tour of Viet Nam... I didn't consider
myself a boy at the time. I've heard many a mother and father say
"that's my boy" or "that's my girl" at numerous sporting events as
well as son and daughter as they swell up with pride for a child's
accomplishment.
Ken
|
60.69 | | NEXUS::CONLON | | Mon Aug 01 1988 15:25 | 63 |
| RE: .65
Justine, I *also* feel compelled to say that I always say
"Thank you" when someone opens the door for me (and that I
open doors for other people, male and female, as often as
doors are opened for me.)
The only time I have ever objected to having the door opened
for me is (as you mentioned) if someone makes a big show of
running ahead or falling over himself to get there before me
(or, as has happened a few times, the person literally asks
me to WAIT until he gets there so that he can do it for me
-- "Oh, HOLD ON! I'll get it for you.")
In cases like that, I say, "That's ok, I've got it" (and smile
while I hold the door for the man.)
As oversensitive to this stuff as *some* men are, I'm sure his
version of the tale later was that I huffed at him with, "I
don't need a man to open the door for me." (It's so hard to
remember exact things that people say in upsetting situations
that they probably use the phrase that that they most *associate*
with women who refuse offers to have doors held for them.)
Their intentions are not malicious in any way, of course, but
would be totally mistaken about my attitude and intentions.
Oh well. It happens in the course of interactions between humans.
As an example of why it is best to refrain from using words
that groups find offensive (such as Lady or girl...)
My uncle is a Carmelite Brother (like a monk, sort of) who goes
to various places as part of his work, and one of his projects
every year is to hold special religious meetings for alcoholics
in Hawaii. (He started this after visiting my parents several
times in Honolulu, which is where my family has lived for the
better part of 30+ years.)
My uncle was in World War II and still refers to Japanese people
as Japs. There are a lot of Japanese Americans in Hawaii, and
he refers to them as Japs, also (or at least he did when he
first started working with the local people in Hawaii on this
yearly project.) My parents and I had to take him aside several
times and tell him that it is considered unbelievably insulting
to call Japanese Americans "Japs" (probably because it implies
that they were not really Americans during WWII, which was a
very, very sore point among several_generation_Japanese_American
families at the time.)
My uncle is a sweet person and meant absolutely no harm by the
term. He thought it was an accurate way to refer to Japanese
people (and acceptable.) Nevertheless, my parents and I would
visibly cringe when we would hear him say it because we knew
the kind of hurt it would cause (and that people would definitely
react to him badly because of it.) In other words, the use
of the word would make *HIM* look bad (in the eyes of people
of all races in Hawaii.) So, we were actually HELPING him by
informing him.
The same applies to the use of Lady and girl, sort of. It can
make a person look bad to continuously use those words in some
circles, so it is only polite to point it out to people so that
they can avoid using those words and looking bad. (Or at least
that is how I see it.)
|
60.70 | True Story | RUTLND::KUPTON | Goin' For The Top | Mon Aug 01 1988 16:01 | 27 |
| re:69 NEXUS::CONLON
You just reminded me of an event that occurred this past weekend
with my wife and 2 other females at their place of employment. My
wife was working with a young Spanish woman and a very young
white female (18 yrs.).
The 18 yr. old came up to my wife burbling and gushing "Did
you see that spic? My God, he's an angel, what a hunk!!!!!" My wife
not thinking just smiled at the enthusiasum of this child over an
extremely handsome man. Very quickly she realized the air was tense
and the spanish woman came to my wife and said, "did she say what I
thought I heard?" My wife was embarassed for the scene, and the
18 year old came over to them and asked if the Spanish woman had
seen the man. The white person was then asked by the spanish woman
what she had called the man. The younster replied, "he's the most
beautiful spic I've ever seen." My Spanish women then began to light
into her. My wife interjected before it got too bad and asked why
the use of that word. The youngster then said "that's short for
spanish isn't it?" The young person cried and apologized after she
was told of the derogatory meaning of the word.
Often times we really don't mean to hurt.
(words: lady, girl not used intenionally. Tough to find substitutes)
This story is true. Persons and employer not given to protect the
innocent and the guilty.
Ken
|
60.71 | why indeed? | DECWET::JWHITE | rule #1 | Mon Aug 01 1988 18:25 | 13 |
|
re:.65
Speaking personally, I endeavor to call people what they wish to
be called. [up to and including 'Robert' instead of 'Bob', which
is rather difficult for me; to my black friends this is a typical wasp
hang-up and is a source of constant amusement, but I digress...]
Unfortunately, one usually cannot know what someone wishes to be
called until after one has spoken to them. Therefore, I always choose
the most formal form of address, until told otherwise. So, to answer
the question, yes, of course tell me what you want to be called.
Otherwise, I'll continue to call you by the 'standard' formal title
which, while a reasonable choice, may be offensive to you personally.
And why on earth would I want to be intentionally offensive?
|
60.72 | just a nit | DECWET::JWHITE | rule #1 | Mon Aug 01 1988 18:30 | 7 |
|
re:.66
you refer to the women's studies controvery at the university of
washington (i happen to be taking the class right now during summer
term, this occurred in the spring term). it is a somewhat more
complicated issue than this exchange, out of context, might imply.
|
60.73 | | RANCHO::HOLT | More Foo! | Mon Aug 01 1988 19:33 | 13 |
|
I always try to use the form of address that seems appropriate
to the situation. Anyone who hasn't spent the last 20 years
in a cave knows that these are "charged words", and should be
used only when one is *very sure* their use will not offend.
To me it is just courtesy and common sense. If a woman lets
me know she does not care to be called "Lady", I don't use the
term. "Lady" to me usually means a wife of a UK peer, just as
"Dame" to me refers to a "Dame of the British Empire".
So don't be terribly suprised by a "Hey Person", or "Yo-female-
person-yes-I-mean-you!" That's just me avoiding charged sexist
words...-;
|
60.74 | | AKOV11::BOYAJIAN | Copyright � 1953 | Tue Aug 02 1988 02:11 | 6 |
| re:.71
I wondered why on at least one occasion you referred to me as
"Mr. Boyajian". :-)
--- jerry
|
60.75 | Feel Free To Elaborate. Please!! | FDCV16::ROSS | | Tue Aug 02 1988 09:50 | 12 |
| RE: .72
Yes, I know that the issue is more complicated than the brief
exchange I described. If you like, you can type in the history of
the entire controversy, since you seem to be on the front-line of
accurate, up-to-date information.
A part of the issue is that some students (male and female) feel that
the "radicals" who are teaching (some might term it indoctrination)
the course are attempting to expunge any dissenters in their midst.
Alan
|
60.76 | All ladies are women ! | TAINO::GONZALEZEF | A man and a gentleman | Wed Aug 03 1988 01:08 | 25 |
| Being a WOMEN interest notefile, I respectfully ask all the LADIES
noters to pardon this reply from a latin (macho/caballero)...!
My mother taught me that all women are ladies, but I consider
that even though all ladies are women, not all women are ladies !
I would use "lady" as a compliment, such as:
"Margaritte, thanks for a great time, my dear lady".
To somebody special I would never say something like:
"Thanks for a great time, lady".
I consider that using "lady" by itself is cold and impersonal,
unless it is used as a sign of respect towards a not-so-close
or older woman.
So, it is a matter of semantics, respectfulness, and love !
As you have noticed, I have not adventured into the ethimological
roots of the words LADIES and WOMAN, which were not questioned
in .0; it is just a survey, isn't it ?
Efrain
(who loves all women that are ladies, and all ladies that are women)
|
60.77 | "Lady" carries too much *&^ baggage | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Wed Aug 03 1988 14:53 | 11 |
| "Lady" has evoked a negative response from me ever since I was in
high school and the school department policy was that high school
boys could play on interscholastic teams, but there *were* no teams
for the girls.
The reason? Playing sports was "UNLADYLIKE".
Fooey.
--DE
|
60.78 | more door digression | ULTRA::ZURKO | UI:Where the rubber meets the road | Wed Aug 03 1988 18:30 | 7 |
| I could hug the person that started designing two sets of doors at each
entryway of public buildings. For those few unfortunate times that I run
into a male-type-person who insists on holding the door for me, I can insist
on holding the door for him (if I've got 1/2 an hour while I look at him
and try to make non-threatenting body language talk at him, to convince
him to walk through the damn open door first).
Mez
|
60.79 | Don't quite see what the problem is | ULTRA::WRAY | John Wray | Fri Aug 05 1988 00:18 | 2 |
| What's the problem with holding doors for people? I think it's pretty
rude to slam a door in somebody's face, irrespective of sex.
|
60.80 | An attitudinal one. | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Fri Aug 05 1988 11:04 | 20 |
| John,
Nothing, per se. However, when a man makes a big show of racing
around and opening a door for a woman, it does [sometimes] look
like he is thinking, "Here, weak, stupid woman. I will work this
door fastener for you which you do not have the brains to operate,
and then I will swing open this dweat, heavy door which you do not
have the strength to open or the stamina to keep open."
Not an agreeable thought, is it?
Also, many of us remember that it was used as an argument against
equality: "Well, we can ignore all these clamoring women, because
they really want us to open doors and hold chairs for them." Why
a woman would rather get fifty-nine cents on the dollar and have
an occasional door opened for her instead of being paid the full
dollar, and *tipping* whoever opened the door for her was a question
not to be asked.
Ann B.
|
60.81 | | RANCHO::HOLT | More Foo! | Fri Aug 05 1988 13:35 | 8 |
|
re -.1
That is how you choose to hold the gesture... as a threat or
insult.
Where is the great payoff in returning a insult to
a guy unfortunate enough to have encountered you on the steps?
|
60.82 | | ULTRA::WRAY | John Wray | Fri Aug 05 1988 15:38 | 34 |
| Re .78, .80
Whenever anyone "makes a big show" of _any_ act of courtesy or consideration,
then the act stops being courteous, and is at best self-congratulatory and
at worst a put down. However, it is not productive to retaliate on the basis
of an unwarranted assumption of the perpetrator's motives.
When I hold the door for someone, it is because I got to the door first, but
only slightly before someone else who also wishes to pass through it. The
decision as to whether to hold the door and wait for the other party to pass,
whether to go through and hold the door behind me, or whether to go through
without holding the door depends on what sort of mood I'm in, how much of a
hurry I'm in, whether I'm going in the same direction as the other party,
whether the other party genuinely needs help (eg is carrying something in
both hands), and whether the small delay I incur as a result of holding the
door will speed the other's passage through it.
When someone holds a door for me, I appreciate the gesture, and in general
will hurry through the door so as not to hold them up unduly.
Whether the "someone else" is a woman, man or penguin is not an issue.
If the act of door-holding (as opposed to the attitude displayed by the
holder) really is an issue, the only solution I can see is for me to
start discriminating on the basis of sex - I can continue to hold the
door for men in the interests of efficient passage, but will refuse to
hold the door for women. I can continue to walk through doors held open
by members of either sex.
I can't work out whether I will be practicing positive or negative
discrimination by doing this, but either way it doesn't seem to be
particularly in the interests either of equality, or of efficient
door-use.
|
60.83 | Elaborations | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Fri Aug 05 1988 15:46 | 15 |
| Your sentence should read "That is how one may choose to hold..."
^^^ ^^^
The men *I* associate with do it because 1) they are closer ior
2) they were well brought up and don't have any other reason for
doing it.
Should a man be so ill-bred as to open a door for me with a
condescending smile, he may find himself to be the unfortunate
recipient of two or more quarters. (Bills are too hard to get at.)
Mostly, I enjoy my fellow humans too much to be unkind to them on
first acquaintance. I am far more likely to greet stereotypical
behavior with a smile and a silent "How classic!"
Ann B.
|
60.84 | My mama was a Greyhound, my daddy a Weimaraner... | RANCHO::HOLT | More Foo! | Fri Aug 05 1988 18:43 | 12 |
|
re English lesson
Why, I thank you (as Kirk might say it).
What, exactly, constitutes "condescending"..?
Is it the angle of the nose, or the amount of 'tooth'
showing (I may allow my brows an almost imperceptible rise)?
Better that we scuttle anonymously through the door on our good
leg than betray our base roots, and ill-breeding...
|
60.85 | the magic words | NOETIC::KOLBE | The diletante debutante | Fri Aug 05 1988 19:41 | 5 |
|
As Ann and some others have pointed out not all women are hostile
to those who open doors. If I get to the door first, I open it.
If someone opens it for me I say thank you. My mother would have it
no other way. Being polite is never the wrong action. liesl
|
60.86 | | NEXUS::CONLON | | Fri Aug 05 1988 20:02 | 16 |
|
True, Liesl -- I'd even go so far as to say that there are very
*few* women anymore who would react with hostility at a door
being opened for them (unless there were some other factor present
that added to the situation enough to warrant a negative reaction.)
In the entire 20 or so years since the women's movement started,
I have walked through a lot of doors (along with men and women)
and I have never ever witnessed anything that could be considered
to be even close to a door-opening confrontation.
I've never even seen anyone raise an eyebrow over it, in fact.
Both women and men hold door open for me, and I thank them for
it. I hold doors open for both women and men, and they thank
me for it. I've never seen it be a problem.
|
60.87 | Digital has it now | NOETIC::KOLBE | The diletante debutante | Fri Aug 05 1988 20:10 | 6 |
|
Of course Digital solved the entire problem here at CXO3 with
those automatic doors. Now it's a case of who stands in the
light beam so the door will open!! Technology to the rescue.
liesl :*)
|
60.88 | Slight tangent here... | NEXUS::CONLON | | Fri Aug 05 1988 20:59 | 31 |
| Yes! The automatic doors are great!
I guess they turned out to be a necessity here for weather factors
(rather than rules of etiquette.)
For people not familiar with our lovely facility at CX03, the
building lies in some sort of wind tunnel (which means that
if there is a gentle breeze anywhere in Colorado Springs at
all, there is a gale blowing through the walkway leading to
the only entrance to our building.)
The gusts are so bad, on occasion, that it is enough to blow a
door off its hinges when opened with the inside surface exposed
to the full force of the wind. (When we had manual doors, they
used to put signs up about not opening the right sides.)
So now, the doors are all automatic (opening to each side) --
it's like walking onto the Star Ship Enterprise. :)
Another interesting feature of this facility is the resident
owl who lives up on the right front corner of the building.
I've seen him a few times -- he stares right at you as you
walk toward the entrance. He is beautiful and quite large.
Other people have seen large animals walking among the cars
in our parking lot at times (like deer and big horn sheep, I
think.) Driving in at night, I've had to slow down at times
to let deer finish crossing the road within 100 feet of the
plant down the hill from CX03. They seem comfortable with
living near us. I guess they think computer people are fairly
harmless. :)
|
60.89 | Rathole Alert! | AKOV11::BOYAJIAN | Copyright � 1953 | Sat Aug 06 1988 04:52 | 10 |
| re:.88
Actually, the most impressive aspect *I* found of the CXO facility
during my one visit there, was the incredible view of the mountains
right outside the door. But, then, I suppose you Springers have
gotten jaded about that by now. :-)
And this is getting too far off the topic...
--- jerry
|
60.90 | now for something completely irrelevant | YODA::BARANSKI | Searching the Clouds for Rainbows | Mon Aug 08 1988 09:44 | 14 |
| "Should a man be so ill-bred as to open a door for me with a condescending
smile, he may find himself to be the unfortunate recipient of two or more
quarters."
Ho! That's a good comeback...
Actually, when I hold a door open for someone, I usually hold the door and let
them go through first. Would that be interpreted different? It seems a lot
easier then standing on the wrong side of the door and trying to muscle it open
from the hinge end. I guess it depends on which way the door opens. Doors
usually open outwards for fire regulations; I guees that means I hold doors more
going in, then going out.
JMB
|
60.91 | | AQUA::WALKER | | Mon Aug 08 1988 10:27 | 9 |
| Behaving like a lady or gentleman speaks to me of childhood admonitions
not to show what you are really like. During the time one is behaving
like a lady one must take care not to show exuberance, desire, hunger,
emotion, strength or intelligence. One must be careful that the
dress it at all times perfectly clean and pressed, everything must
remain in it's place - feet together, white gloved hands in the
lap - picture perfect.
Behaving like a lady was a time of many restrictions.
|
60.92 | My 2 Cents | ATPS::GREENHALGE | Mouse | Mon Aug 08 1988 11:12 | 16 |
|
re: 80
Ann,
I do not agree. Personally, I think those men that do (and they
are few and far in between) open doors for a woman, and seat them
at dinner, etc., are showing exceptionally good manners.
It seems like any woman who thinks a man "looks like he is thinking,
'Here, weak, stupid woman. I will work this door fastener...'"
is a pretty suspicious woman, and maybe shouldn't be out with this
man.
Just my opinion.
|
60.93 | you can tell | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Mon Aug 08 1988 12:58 | 11 |
| re: .92
And I disagree with *you*. I think it is exceedingly easy to tell
whether a man is opening doors, holding chairs, etc. in a friendly,
companionable manner or a condescending, obnoxious manner.
It's just that the different feelings you get are not measurable
on some "vibe-device" and therefore are invalid. [:-|]
--DE
|
60.94 | oops | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Mon Aug 08 1988 14:36 | 13 |
| clarification to previous REPLY:
I mean to say that the feelings ONE gets about others' attitudes
are unmeasurable on a scientific device, and therefore, if ONE
chooses to voice them, can easily be told she is [pick one]
crazy, nuts, over-reacting, "on the rag", strident, etc.
Hope that makes clear anything that might've been unclear about
my last sentence. Sorry about the use of "you-generic" in a note
where I started out REPLYing to "you-specific".
--DE
|
60.95 | | ULTRA::ZURKO | UI:Where the rubber meets the road | Mon Aug 08 1988 15:09 | 4 |
| It isn't even that un-scientific Dawn. By the time the nth person, who always
happens to be male, refuses to walk through a door you (who happen to be
female) are holding open, one does begin to catch on.
Mez
|
60.96 | miss manners | NOETIC::KOLBE | The Laughing Lady | Mon Aug 08 1988 16:27 | 18 |
|
<It isn't even that un-scientific Dawn. By the time the nth person, who always
<happens to be male, refuses to walk through a door you (who happen to be
<female) are holding open, one does begin to catch on.
< Mez
Maybe things are different out here in the west but I've never had a man
refuse to walk through a door I've held open for him.
Also, I get the feeling that some women are confusing the strictures of what
they consider "ladyhood" ie: dress right, walk right etc, with what is merely
common courtesy. You don't have to wear a dress and white gloves to be polite
and it is not (IMHO) a restriction of your rights to expect you to exhibit a
little courtesy. Well, I suppose it is a restriction of your rights but a
necessary one if we are to live together on this crowded planet. I don't exactly
agree with Miss Manners on everything but I do believe we could improve our
manners in this day and age. liesl
|
60.97 | redefining "lady" | DOODAH::RANDALL | Bonnie Randall Schutzman | Tue Aug 09 1988 09:28 | 3 |
| It's worth pointing out that Miss Manners is a feminist . . .
--bonnie
|
60.98 | | RANCHO::HOLT | Robert Holt, UCO-1 | Tue Aug 09 1988 13:47 | 5 |
|
re Miss Manners
I love how she arches her eyebrows... her byline photo
is the very picture of uppercrust studied comtempt..
|
60.99 | Beyond Door Holding | PRYDE::ERVIN | | Wed Aug 24 1988 08:59 | 19 |
| And then there are then men who insist on making sure that 'ladies'
always get off the elevator before them. Is this so they can get
a good view of our *sses? I mean, I've had total strangers put
their hand on my back to guide me out of the elevator. Perhaps
they didn't think I was capable of navigating through the door?
And just who the hell is this total stranger who feels that he has
the right to invade my body space by touching me?
But what this really has to do with is the politics of touch, who
can touch whom. Men always assume that they can touch women, er,
'ladies'. Male bosses walk up to female secretaries and put a hand
on the shoulder or the back while issuing instructions, etc, etc.
How many 'ladies' would walk up to their male, or female boss for
that matter, and put a hand on the boss' shoulder or back?
But as we ALL know, a REAL 'lady' never minds being touched by a
total stranger. REAL women, however, may deck you for this behaviour.
|
60.100 | The Power of Names | PRYDE::ERVIN | | Wed Aug 24 1988 09:06 | 19 |
| re: .24
I agree, Peggy, names are powerful. I have had several, mainly
because I am an adoptee. I remember distinctly that the ground
moved beneath my feet when I learned my original name, the name
my birthmother gave me. WOW. Now I tend to mix all the name together,
I like them all for different reasons.
I hated being a student teacher because my supervisor insisted that
the students call me Ms. Ervin. I like first name basis, less formal
and more real. I'm Laura, not Ms. Ervin.
Regards,
Laura (-)
| I do like those Goddess symbols. Made of gold, gathered
together in one place, a shrine to the Goddess, she
would be present.
|
60.101 | | NEXUS::CONLON | | Wed Aug 24 1988 09:12 | 18 |
| RE: .99
You just hit on something I have always been curious about.
What is this invisible spot that women have in the middle of
our backs that men seem to instinctively know how to use when
they want to 'steer' a woman through a door of some sort?
(Or should I say 'push' a woman through...) :)
I used to think that only familiar men used this invisible
spot for propelling women forward, but I, too, have seen
total strangers moving women in this manner.
Is there some unwritten rule somewhere that if a woman needs
help propelling herself forward, that this one spot is the
acceptable place for any men to provide momentum?
It is supposed to be like a bumper on a car? :) :)
|
60.102 | etiquette | TFH::MARSHALL | hunting the snark | Wed Aug 24 1988 11:10 | 24 |
| re .99:
As I understand the rules of etiquette:
A man is supposed to follow a woman up the stairs and lead her down.
This is not so he can look up her dress, but to be in position to
catch her if she should trip.
Similarly with elevators. I believe the man is supposed to follow
a woman off the elevator and lead her on. The rationale being that
the woman is exposed to the dangerous situation the least.
I think that at first there was some confusion surrounding the
etiquette of the elevator. One argument could be that it is like
a carriage, the man should get in last and get out first, so as
to assist the lady with the step. The other argument being that like
any other door, the lady should always enter first.
/
( ___
) ///
/
|
60.103 | Jeeves, the smelling salts! | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Wed Aug 24 1988 11:37 | 10 |
| RE: 102
And then there's the argument that women are perfectly capable of
going up stairs and getting on elevators without help.
I haven't seen any one of have the vapors on a staircase in...
oh...it must be *weeks* now. :-}
--DE
|
60.104 | | MSD29::STHILAIRE | Food, Shelter & Jewelry | Wed Aug 24 1988 11:46 | 31 |
| One thing that really annoys me is when a man insists that I walk
first (up stairs or on a crowded sidewalk, whatever) when *he* knows
the way and *I* don't. The last time that happened I turned around
and said, "Since I don't know the way and you do, would you just
go first!" I don't think politeness should be overdone to the point
of being ridiculous.
I also find it annoying to have a man help me on with my coat.
For god's sake, I'm not 2 yrs. old! I can understand it on a first
date when I realize the guy is just trying to act nice or whatever
and treat me like a "lady" (I said understand not appreciate) but
I see no need for it to go on and on as tho I never did learn to
put my coat on.
As far as holding doors, if someone's walking behind me I hold the
door for them so it won't slam in their face. I think that's what
anyone should do for anybody else regardless of sex. One thing
I notice about holding doors around DEC plants. When I hold the
door for a man he almost always (maybe even 100%-not sure) says,
"Thanks". When I hold the door for another woman she hardly ever
says anything. I can't figure that out. Because of this I always
make sure *I* say thank you when another woman holds the door for
me. (Why should we treat men better than we treat each other?)
I'm most comfortable with men who treat me like a buddy rather than
a "lady". If I'm treated like a "lady" I feel like I have to live
up to their expectations of an attractive woman on a date instead
of just relaxing and being a friend.
Lorna
|
60.105 | precedance rules at portals... | CSSE32::PHILPOTT | The Colonel | Wed Aug 24 1988 11:52 | 43 |
|
My mother rationalised the "in and out first" rules to me as a
child like this:
in and out of elevators: A gentleman should position himself by
the "door open" button and hold it down whilst the ladies enter
or leave - that way they don't get 'grabbed' by the doors.
Stairs: a gentleman should be in a position to catch the lady if
she falls. However with spiral staircases (where the risk of
inadvertently seeing up the ladies skirt is high, and were
trying to catch her if she falls might lead to both of you
falling) the gentleman should lead up, and follow down, whilst
holding the hand she is not using to hold the handrail.
Escalators: the gentleman should stand by the emergency power
switch whilst the lady rides up or down in case her shoe, or
dress hem catches in the mechanism (no good trying to catch
somebody in this case - kill the power fast).
With stairs or escalators the gentleman should carry any bags
the lady was carrying in her hands (she would however keep a
shoulder bag) so as to leave her with both hands free.
Building [exterior] doors: hold the door open FROM THE OUTSIDE
so as to be in a position to defend the lady from lurking
aggressors.
Interior doors: stand aside and let the lady go first. If the
door is at all heavy then hold it open if you can do so without
physical contact. If door is very heavy (eg some doors in
theters and other public buildings) and standing inside whilst
holding it open would cause physical contact then pass through
and hold open from outside the room, as if it were an exterior
door.
Cars/carriages: like buildings.
Revolving doors and turnstiles are a special case to be treated
on the merits of the actual situation...
/. Ian .\
|
60.106 | | CSSE32::PHILPOTT | The Colonel | Wed Aug 24 1988 12:14 | 18 |
|
A gentleman helps a lady on with her coat, not because she
cannot do it herself, but because the process of groping around
behind your back to find the second sleeve is undignified, and
yes, unladylike
Secondly of course if the coats have been checked (in a
restaurant or theater) or merely placed on a coat rack, it would
be the gentleman who went to fetch them: since he is carrying
the lady's coat it is natural for him to help her put it on.
As for walking behind a lady in a crowded environment that is
simply bad manners: the gentleman should go first so that he is
the one pushed and shoved by the unruly masses, and so that his
progress opens a pathway for the lady to make dignified
progress.
/. Ian .\
|
60.107 | | MSD29::STHILAIRE | Food, Shelter & Jewelry | Wed Aug 24 1988 12:41 | 10 |
| Re .106, well, I find it easier and quicker to just slip my coat
on myself, having had years of practice, than to group around in
back of me to find the sleeve while the man is holding my coat.
(I'm always afraid I'm going to ram my hand into his crotch instead
of my coatsleeve!)
Lorna
P.S. But then I think of the weirdest things.
|
60.108 | Yes, it's happened to me. | REGENT::BROOMHEAD | Don't panic -- yet. | Wed Aug 24 1988 13:28 | 6 |
| Lorna,
You missed the obvious problem: Having your arm thoughtfully
directed into the wrong sleeve.
Ann B.
|
60.109 | | RANCHO::HOLT | I seen 'em..! | Wed Aug 24 1988 13:40 | 4 |
|
re -.1
That's something I would do...-;
|
60.110 | can I try??? :*) | BLITZN::LITASI | Sherry Litasi | Wed Aug 24 1988 15:17 | 1 |
| or have your arm directed into the wrong crotch :*)
|
60.111 | my turn! | USMRM2::PMONFALCONE | | Wed Aug 24 1988 16:38 | 5 |
| Re: 110
...I like that one better!
;)
Paula
|
60.112 | Who gets to grab? | PRYDE::ERVIN | | Wed Aug 24 1988 17:16 | 9 |
| re: .105
"that way they don't get 'grabbed' by the doors"...
we can, instead, be grabbed by the men. spare me, I'll take
my chances tango-ing with the doors!
!!!
|
60.113 | | RANCHO::HOLT | vemen barestu? | Thu Aug 25 1988 00:31 | 9 |
|
Usually I try and push in front of a woman headed for the same door
on the assumption that I will bound up the stairs faster than
she will anyway. I'm not going to let them believe that I'm
checking out their buns or anything like that...
Also, I try and slam the door on my way through so as to cause
enough delay for me to avoid being in the stairwell alone with
her even for a few seconds.
|
60.114 | mostly a hold over, me thinks | YODA::BARANSKI | Searching the Clouds for Rainbows | Thu Aug 25 1988 03:55 | 21 |
| 'leading 'ladies' in case they trip'
I imagine that alot of this dates back to when women wore dresses longer then
they were tall, and wore shoes with high heels which have little traction at
that surface area and angle. With that given, it sounds like a reasonable idea
to me.
"What is this invisible spot that women have in the middle of our backs that men
seem to instinctively know how to use when they want to 'steer' a woman through
a door of some sort?"
I suspect that it's the same place that men have their hand on a woman's back
when leading when dancing. Could also be why some men have a lot of practice at
it. Myself, I think it might be nice to let the woman lead once in a while.
As for doors and stairs, I'm an inconsiderate sort. I will stand and hold the
door for over a second if it suits me or not do it at all if it doesn't.
Stairs I usually run up or down all the time, so I want to be in front so
I don't have to wait and idle behind other people. :-)
JMB
|
60.115 | 1988 | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Thu Aug 25 1988 11:32 | 21 |
| I am sure most of this stuff dates back to when women wore even
more outrageous clothes than we do now - high heels an apparent
exception. However: it is 1988.
We run marathons.
We fix automobiles.
We *build* buildings.
We lift weights.
We are more than capable of putting on coats. (especially since
very few gentlemen are capable of holding them in a way which makes
it easier - mostly, it's more difficult)
We are more than capable of climbing stairs.
We haven't worn bustles in a while now, and as I said before,
it been weeks, at least, since one of us had the Vapors and needed
to be caught.
--DE
|
60.116 | | UPOVAX::NOVELLO | | Thu Aug 25 1988 12:34 | 15 |
|
Please forgive me for replying to a note without properly
intorducing myself in the proper note.
This notesfile cleared up a mystery that had been puzzling me for
6 years. Whenever I followed a female up stairs, she would turn
around and give me a dirty look. Neither my wife or sister-in-law
could figure it out. I finally realized that my face was at eye
level with their backsides and they proably thought I was taking
a good look.
I now keep a greater distance and try to look pre-occupied with
my thoughts - no more dirty looks!
Guy Novello
|
60.118 | touching | ULTRA::ZURKO | UI:Where the rubber meets the road | Mon Aug 29 1988 13:45 | 8 |
| > How many 'ladies' would walk up to their male, or female boss for
> that matter, and put a hand on the boss' shoulder or back?
Me (but then, I didn't vote to be called lady). Touching is so wierd. I worry
about touching too much. I worry about not touching too much (re: hollywood
hugs). Just a visceral person lost in a material world...
Mez
|
60.119 | For what it's worth... | QUARK::LIONEL | In Search of the Lost Code | Mon Aug 29 1988 15:23 | 10 |
| Regarding the issue of men "propelling" women by the back... I
can't recall ever doing this, not that that matters particularly.
But the other night I was watching an old movie ("Father's Little
Dividend" with Spencer Tracy and Elizabeth Taylor), and happened
to notice a case where one of the male characters propelled ANOTHER
MALE character through the door with the "hand on the back". Thought
this was interesting... I looked but didn't see a man propelling
a woman this way in the film.
Steve
|
60.120 | who can push whom | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Tue Aug 30 1988 15:01 | 5 |
| I think what you'll see is the "more powerful person" is allowed
to propel the "less powerful person".
--DE
|
60.121 | | AKOV12::MILLIOS | I grok. Share water? | Tue Aug 30 1988 17:57 | 4 |
| "Powerful" equalling "assertive", "aggressive", or in a job-related
situation, "higher-ranking", I'll agree...
Bill
|
60.122 | | VINO::EVANS | Never tip the whipper | Wed Aug 31 1988 12:30 | 16 |
| RE: 121
No, actually, Bill, what I meant by "powerful" is simply
"higher-ranking" in general. For 2 men, that ususally is a carry-over
from the job - the guys go out for drinks, and the boss propels
the junior guy thru the door ahead of him.
For a man and a woman, "higher-ranking" is usually *taken to be*
the man, in any social situation, unless of course the woman really
*is* his boss at work.
Certainly a "lower-ranking" woman who is "agressive" enough could
propel a man, but it would not be accepted gracefully by said man.
--DE
|
60.123 | elevators are REALLY dangerous! (.102) | MUNICH::WEYRICH | | Tue Sep 20 1988 06:40 | 18 |
| I feel the same way as Pat (in 60.44). WOMAN to me is a female adult
while LADY is something a bit artificial - refined by WHOSE standards,
anyway?
I do open doors for men and women and don't mind if anybody does
it for me. I don't like being helped into my coat - it always costs
me a few thousands of my (still long) hair. Worst thing: I HATE
men lighting my cigarette! They mostly keep the lighter somewhere
near my navel, so I have to bow down -no,I WOULD HAVE to bow down
if I wouldn't simply prefer to take the man's hand with the lighter
and lift it up to my convenience....
I just LOVE the way elderly english gentlemen (sic) call a young
woman "dear" or "love" - I mean it.
Anyway: what I mean when talking about emancipation: I WANT YOUR
RIGHTS, MEN, BUT WANT TO KEEP MY FEMALE PRIVILEGES AS WELL ;)
pony
+
|
60.124 | | 2EASY::PIKET | | Wed Nov 02 1988 15:33 | 16 |
|
Hope it's not to late to enter another opinion. It's all been said
before, so I'll just cast my vote. I think lady is okay if used
as an endearing term. Same for honey, sweetie, and even "Pookie"
(a favorite of my last boyfriend who was not at all sexist and
was extremely politically correct). .I hate it when strange men use
the word 'honey' or any others. I find it patronizing and sexist.
The only possible exception to this is if an old man calls me 'dear',
and I believe it is meant more in a grandfatherly fashion than a
sexist fashion, the same way he'd call a young man "son".
Whew! I guess I had to speak my piece after all!
Roberta
|
60.125 | sounded tuff | ULTRA::ZURKO | UI:Where the rubber meets the road | Wed Nov 02 1988 15:38 | 3 |
| OK, a woman womannoter called me lady today, and it felt good. How 'bout that.
Must have been the tone I read it in :-).
Mez
|
60.126 | | RANCHO::HOLT | I'm more than chopped liver.. | Fri Nov 04 1988 03:09 | 3 |
|
I use whatever term I feel appropriate, and if they don't
like it... well that is a tuff break.
|
60.127 | ...by any other name | IAMOK::GONZALEZ | | Mon Dec 12 1988 20:04 | 50 |
|
I couldn't spend all that time early this morning reading all 126
notes here without saying *something*.
I have more female friends than male friends and, interestingly
enough, I have just noticed (prior to entering this conference)
how when referring to one another I've heard the word lady
several times - as in "Debby? Yes she's a very nice lady (and
I might add that the woman who said this was older than Debby by
not a few years).
And while mentioning what women refer to each other why does my
mother (in her 60s) refer to herself *and* the women she works
with as 'the girls'
If this is male-dominated social programming (which I contend it
is) can we have a little mercy among the male gender. We have
been programmed to and not all of us are fortunate enough to
ever question, let alone break away from, these pig-headed ideals.
By the way I am guilty of perhaps holding the door open too long
for both men and women (who are to me - should I know them Sir
and Ma'am - military training dontcha know)and that can let the
cold air in! Also please note that I help my friends with their
coats and jackets - both *male* and female. I haven't gotten a
crotchful of knuckles yet because if you know what you're doing
it is not a difficult procedure *and, I know for a fact* that
when some women dress for an important occasion they might not
either A.)want to move around too much or B.)can move around too
much.
And I'm getting on in my years but am certainly not old enough
to have a use for helping women up stairs and get on and off
elevators unless, of course, they were unduly burdoned or
perhaps just getting on in their years. Yes, you can do that
on your own. By the way - where is that spot on your back?
One last thing if I may. I too felt that statement about being
a woman connects you with other women but that being a lady doesn't
was *very well put*. However, I would like to stat as a male that
I feel the opposite - and I could be alone in this. I do not want
to feel connected or likened to most of the men I meet. I would
rather be separated into the context of gentleman - if it is offered.
Of course, once again this might just show the devaluation in the
nouns used to depict the female gender.
Respectfuly,
Luis
|
60.128 | | ULTRA::ZURKO | UI:Where the rubber meets the road | Tue Dec 13 1988 07:52 | 12 |
| > I do not want
> to feel connected or likened to most of the men I meet. I would
> rather be separated into the context of gentleman - if it is offered.
> Of course, once again this might just show the devaluation in the
> nouns used to depict the female gender.
My guess: it's the standard devaluing of relationships. Men are taught to be
rugged individualists. Women are taught to support and nurture. And, of course,
what men are taught is 'better' than what women are taught. So, women might be
congratulated on acting like men, but men are almost never congratulated on
acting like a woman.
Mez
|
60.129 | | NEXUS::MORGAN | Snazzy Personal Name Upon Request | Sat Dec 17 1988 16:20 | 1 |
| Woman is warm, cozey and sexual. Lady is prissy and prudish.
|
60.130 | | COGMK::CHELSEA | Mostly harmless. | Mon Dec 19 1988 19:37 | 1 |
| In some contexts, though, "lady" connotes power and authority.
|
60.131 | WOMAN IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE | WLDWST::GUTIERREZ | | Sat Feb 25 1989 17:16 | 5 |
|
TO ME A LADY IS RIGHT AFTER A TEENAGER.BECAUSE THEN SHE BECOMES
A LADY THEN WHEN SHE IS MARRIED OR BECOMES INTERESTED IN MEN THEN
SHE BECOMES A WOMAN.THOSE ARE MY OPINIONS
ANGELINA
|
60.132 | | AMUN::CRITZ | A noid is annoyed | Tue Feb 28 1989 11:22 | 8 |
| RE: 60.131
Angelina (beautiful name)
Please use mixed-case letters. All caps is the same as
shouting in notes.
Scott
|