Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    Many women feel that it makes perfect political sense, Alfred, even
    though no etymological sense at all.  (And I agree, btw, even though I
    don't usually feel the need to do it myself)
    
    						=maggie 

    Political sense? I don't understand?
    
    		Alfred

This discussion came up some time ago in another conference to which I
belong. I don't have much time to devote to writing new notes these days,
so here a some extracts from that discussion that may explain the
usage: 

etymology:

	wif (WIFE) + man (person, MAN)

The fact that man is a term that has been appropriated in the English 
language for both generic human and male human is indicative of how 
patriarchy takes maleness as the norm of humanity and human experience.
A female human, in this word, is defined as the WIFE of a PERSON.  
Originally in old English _wif_ meant only a "female", not necessarily a
spouse, but the transformation of that word to mean only a man's spousal
dependent is indicative of the de-evolution of womyn's status, and an
attempt to define her only in terms of her relation to and social
dependency upon males. 

Many wimmin choose not to accept a patriarchal language that treats
woMAN/woMEN as a variation of MAN/MEN. They choose to use alternative
spellings as a way of expressing the challenge to create a definition of
woman/womon/womyn/wimminkind that is free of androcentrism.  

       It's curious that "wyf" in old english words like "alewyf",
       "fishwyf" and "huswyf" means something closer to "manager" or
       "worker". Hence and alewife is the [female] equivalent of a
       publican or "landlord"... On which basis I would tend to read
       "woman" (if it really is derived from "wyf"+"man") as being a
       person who controls her man... (quite possible since in many
       respects old Celtic societies were matriarchal in nature).

       However I have to admit that my first reaction to the recent note
       asking why "wimmin" earn less than men was the lame witticism
       that perhaps it was because they lacked the command of English
       necesary to spell a simple five letter word...

       As for the political point: I quite agree, since a group without
       a unique identity lacks power...

       /. Ian .\

    This entomological history seems to stop a long time ago.
    The language changes and woman no longer means wife of a man
    it means a female human being. I do not accept the notion that
    English is a patriarchal language eather (especially when compared to
    many (most?) other languages.
    
    I guess the biggest problem I have is that the alternate spellings
    look like corruption of an existing, and perfectly good, word. I
    think that a more appropriate response to a perceived patriarchal
    indication of the existing word would be to come up with a whole
    new word. This new word would not have the historical baggage of
    a corrupted existing word. Ms. as a replacement for Miss or Mrs.
    is an example. It is not a corruption of Mistress or Miss but
    a whole new word; though it does map well with the existing structure.
    
    				Alfred

    
    Today, my fiance and I were discussing our wedding and he (23 yrs
    old, I am 22) told me, "I want the minister to say, 'I now pronounce
    you *husband* and wife.' and not the usual Man and Wife." 
    
    When I asked him why he stated that it just sounds more equal. :-)
    Needless to say I was pleasantly surprised that he had given this
    some thought.  This just goes back to my reference in Note #4 that
    I believe the younger generation (males) for the most part have
    been raised to believe men and women are *equals* (for the lack
    of a more definitive word).
    
    I realize this has little to do with the "wimmin" issue.  Personally,
    I am comfortable with the original spelling of the word woman and
    frankly, it never occurred to me that it was sexist because the
    word "woman" incorporates the word "man."
    

    re .6 - why not have the minister say "I now pronounce you wife and 
    husband"? He's still getting top billing...
    
    One obvious problem with the alternate spelling is that, to many, it 
    seems petty and distracts from legitimate concerns. Rather than 
    using it as a generic replacement spelling, reserving it for 
    specific political purposes such as organizational or event names 
    (it is, after all, primarily a political statement) might reduce 
    this problem.
    
    In the context of VAX Notes, another problem is clear: spelling is 
    generally so abysmal throughout most conferences (this one is no 
    exception) that it simply looks like a misteak - er, misstake - er, 
    mistake. 

   "This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; 
    This one shall be called 'woman,' 
    for out of 'her man' this one has been taken." 

re .6

    I once heard someone say that they really didn't see any
    difference between "man and wife" and "husband and wife"...I
    said in that case, no doubt he wouldn't mind being married by
    a minister who would pronounce the couple "man and woman."  ;)

    It did make me wonder, though...why did a man ever need to be
    pronounced "a man" at that point?  Is there some historical
    or cultural reason why a man wasn't a "man" unless he'd gone
    through the appropriate adult-hood ritual...marriage?  Seems
    unlikely, but it did make me curious!

    -- Linda

       �It  did  make me wonder, though...why did a man ever need to be 
       �pronounced  "a  man" at that point? Is there some historical or 
       �cultural  reason  why  a  man  wasn't  a "man" unless he'd gone 
       �through  the  appropriate  adult-hood  ritual...marriage? Seems 
       �unlikely, but it did make me curious!

       Well actually yes there is.

       In England (and hence in common English language usage), a young 
       man  used  the  appellation "master" (Hence when I was younger I 
       received  mail  addressed to "Master Ian Philpott", not "Mr. Ian 
       Philpott). 

       Back  in the days when the Marriage Ceremony was being written a 
       freeman  remained a 'master' until (a) he completed his training 
       for  the  knighthood (and became "Sir <whatever>") or (b) became 
       entitled  to  the  'title'  "esquire"  at  the age of 21, or (c) 
       acquired  control  of his financial affairs (sometimes at 21 but 
       inherited  property  was  often  acquired under an entailed will 
       when was usually on marriage or sometimes at an older age (25 or 
       30  were  common)).  Serfs transitioned at marriage because they 
       possessed no property to acquire control of.

       Hence  it  is  a  reflection  of  the widespread practice of not 
       allowing  a  young  man to have control of his financial affairs 
       whilst  still  wild  and  single.  He  became a man only when he 
       settled down and assumed responsibility by marrying.

       Incidentally   the  term  'bachelor'  comes  properly  from  the 
       appellation 'bachelor knight' applied to a knight in training.

       /. Ian .\

"Is there some historical or cultural reason why a man wasn't a "man" unless
he'd gone through the appropriate adult-hood ritual...marriage?"

Well, most societies have various adulthood rituals for both sexes, not just
men.  And, yes, there is a need to convey the fact that you are now an adult and
will be treated as such, and that you are no longer a child. 
       
JMB

    I know that among some Jewish groups and unmarried man of any age,
    though he maybe a man for religious things, is still called a boy
    socially (especially by women) until he marries.
    
    			Alfred

    My family has a tradition of giving the family daughters a
    sixteenth-birthday present that symbolizes adulthood.  My mother
    got a watch, which was at the time not something kids ever owned.
    I'm debating whether to get Kat flying lessons or scuba lessons.

    In some of the Jewish families my husband knows, a girl is
    considered a woman at the time of her first menstrual period;
    it's not uncommon to hold a party for friends to celebrate
    the coming of age.  
    
    --bonnie

    When I was 32, I was allowed to drive the family car.  That was
    my transition into adulthood according to my family.  They've never
    considered me a woman, just a "broken" man.  
    
    		Dondi

    While we're searching for a suitable word to replace "woman",
    should we also be considering a new word for "female" (after
    all, it *is* the word "male" with an "fe" prefixing it)?
    
    Come to think of it, "hymen" should probably be "hywymmyn"( or
    is it "hywimmin"?) :-)
    
      Alan

    Well, no, the word "female" is not the word "male" with a prefix.
    Its basis is the Latin "femina".  (For reasons that I do not
    grasp, my little dictionary here claims that "male" comes from
    the Latin "masculus"; the derivation seems a bit far-fetched
    to me.  I suspect that it *really* comes from another of the
    Indo-European languages.)
    
    Anyhow.  As I learned at one of the W.I.T.C.H. lectures, the word
    "femina" was deliberately modified to make it look as if it
    derived from "male".  Isn't that interesting?
    
    							Ann B.

    re: .16
    
    "Male" derives from "masculus" quite nicely according to known
    linguistic rules operating in French (the intermediate language)
    and English:  The "sc" sound became a plain "s" in the transition
    to French, and the "-us" ending dropped to a plain "-e", leaving
    "masule" or "masle".  When the word was imported into English, the
    the "s" was forced out. 
    
    But you can't get from "femina" to "female" without the deliberate
    distortion your lecture pointed out -- "femina" becomes "femme" in
    French and doesn't change in English.  Unless you derive from the
    diminuitive "femella" which means, roughly, "girl". 
    
    I can buy either of those theories.

    --bonnie

    Come to think of it, "hymen" should probably be "hywymmyn"( or
    is it "hywimmin"?) :-)

    why don't we really make a statement with our spelling/pronunciation
    of women and do it:  Houyhnhnm
    
    would serve them Yahoos right.... ;-)
    
    don't worry, it's just an allusion
    
    -Jody

    re:.18
    
    Argh! To quote Malcolm McDowell in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE: "I've got
    a bit of a pain in me gulliver."
    
    --- jerry

    Why not see it the other way - womankind including mankind? (this
    is NOT meant to be obscene...)
    Can't resist: WO is the german word for WHERE....
    Thanks god we have TOTALLY DIFFERENT words over here! (though there's
    other things in our language, of course)
    pony
     +