Group items tagged

_Slate _ blogger Amanda Marcotte examines the decision of Marissa Mayer, Yahoo CEO, to disavow the term "feminist". Mayer suggested that she lacked "the militant drive" and "chip on the shoulder" often accompanying the term. Marcotte counters that "militant drive" and "chip on the shoulder" are code words for traits exhibited by those brave enough to challenge the sexist status quo, even at the risk of personal vilification.

This article helps people who don't understand or think they understand what "feminism" is, to truly understand it. Listed in this article are a variety of words with definitions and some examples. Understanding the definitions of these words may help in a better understanding of the missions of the feminists and what they are up against.

As early as 1690, the terms "mademoiselle" and "demoiselle" were used to signify "unmarried female". In 2012, the French government struck the honorific from official forms and registries, as the result of pressure from two feminist organizations, who argued that no such sexist distinction exists for young males. "You've never wondered why we don't call a single man 'mondamoiseau,' or even 'young male virgin?' " the feminist groups ask on a joint Web site. "Not surprising: this sort of distinction is reserved for women."

This is the second part of the article about political mass communication. It mostly deals with things like collocations, fill-ins, and framing. Collocations are words that are often used with others and so carry a particular connotations because of their association. For example, calling someone a rabid feminist vs. calling them a radical feminist would suggest more danger and wildness because of the use of the word rabid. Fill-ins refer to the use of deliberately obfuscating or vague language which encourages the listeners to respond by filling-in the gaps with their own preconceived notions or biases and can be a helpful persuasive tool. For example, saying something like, "they want to control you." The "they" here is vague and thus allows the listener to fill in with whatever they want. The article also touches on doublespeak and the use of euphemisms to refer to unpleasant topics (George W. Bush and enhanced interrogation anyone?). Framing, more broadly refers to the use of these tactics to get listeners to interpret the speech in certain ways favorable to the speaker.

Courtesy the New York Times Magazine: thoughtful essays on what language reveals about our moment by rotating columnists Virginia Heffernan, Colson Whitehead, Amanda Hess, Michael Pollan, and others. Some sample titles: "The Underground Art of the Insult", "How `Flawless' Became a Feminist Declaration", "How Rock Star Became a Business Buzzword," "When You `Literally Can't Even' Understand Your Teenager."

"Everyone's entitled to their opinion regarding pronoun acceptability." The use of singular "they" has always been a bit disreputable - you might say it, but you wouldn't want to write it down. But now it's a pronoun whose hour has come. A few months ago, the Washington Post style guide accepted it. And it's been welcomed by people who identify as genderqueer and who feel that "he" and "she" don't necessarily exhaust all the gender possibilities. Universities allow students to select it as their personal pronoun. And so does Facebook, so that your friends will get notices like "Wish them a happy birthday." This use of "they" has been around for a long time. It shows up in Shakespeare, Dickens and George Bernard Shaw. Jane Austen was always saying things like "everybody has their failing." But the Victorian grammarians made it a matter of schoolroom dogma that one could only say "Everybody has his failing," with the understanding that "he" stood in for both sexes. That rule wasn't really discredited until the 1970s, when the second-wave feminists made the generic masculine the paradigm of sexism in language. Male critics ridiculed their complaints as a "libspeak tantrum" and accused them of suffering from "pronoun envy." But most writers now realize that the so-called gender-neutral "he" is anything but. Nobody would ever say, "Every candidate thanked his spouse, including Hillary." When you utter "he," you always bring a male to mind. But once the generic masculine fell out of favor, what were we going to replace it with? People weren't about to adopt a brand-new gender-neutral pronoun the way they were adopting gender-neutral job descriptions. "He or she" was impossibly clunky. It was time to restore singular "they" to respectability. And that's been happening, even in edited books and the media.

This blog post explains the relatively new history of 她, the female third-person, or "she." Originally, with standardized writings of Mandarin Chinese, the only third-person pronoun was 他. It was used regardless of the subject's gender. In 1917, linguist Liu Ban Nong proposed "她," but it wasn't until feminist movements and media coverage gained force that the Chinese Government claimed it. Its usage is still being debated today, with people questioning whether or not there needs to be a gendered "them" at all.