Mind Our English

Friday July 15, 2011

The distaff side

RAMBLINGS
By DR LIM CHIN LAM


Examining some issues related to the tender sex.

THE distaff side? A distaff is a stick or spindle that was used in the past for holding wool or flax which was to be spun by hand; and spinning was a seeming preoccupation of women – from which came the term spinster – so that the word distaff, when used as a modifier, means “denoting or concerning women”.

I cannot help but ramble. The word spinster, which is of the feminine gender, is odd. It does not follow the pattern of seamster/seamstress or songster/songstress for the masculine/feminine nouns. In other words, there is no spinster/spinstress. If there were such a masculine/feminine pattern, could spinstress be applied to “an unmarried woman, typically an older women beyond the usual age for marriage”, thus leaving the notional masculine form spinster to be applied to a man like Mahatma Gandhi at his signature spinning wheel? What about Scheherazade, the putative teller of tales of The Thousand And One Nights, who spun tales of wonderment, of jinns and rocs, of magic lamps and flying carpets – but deliberately ended each tale with a cliffhanger night after night ...? Was she a spinner of tales – or a spinstress? But I digress ...

A woman’s lot is an unenviable one. In certain countries, the female is an unwanted being – to be aborted or killed at birth, “accidentally” burnt to death in the kitchen (for reason of bringing an inadequate dowry to a marriage), nonchalantly made the victim of an honour killing, denied an education, prohibited from many activities commonplace in enlightened countries, treated like chattel, etc. It seems almost a tragedy to be born female.

Additionally, womankind has had a bad press. Women have been the butt of unkind and crude remarks and jokes. They have been called all manner of names – from plainly rude to offensive to downright denigratory – such as bimbo, broad, chick, crumpet, harpy, nymphet, nympho, siren, slattern, slut, strumpet, tart, virago, and whore. Even mother-in-law has become a dreaded word to the new bride.

However, there are appropriate terms for the consideration. Please refer to the table for suffixes used to form nouns for the female of our species.

Then there are special forms for the masculine and feminine, as in the following examples: (1) man/woman; (2) gentleman/lady; (3) father/mother; (4) boy/girl; (5) son/daughter; (6) nephew/niece; (7) uncle/aunt; (8) bachelor/spinster; (9) king/queen; (10) monk/nun; (11) wizard/witch; etc.

Okay, the above lists, inclusive of feminine terms, somewhat make up for the harshness of the derogatory names applied to, or hurled at, women. At the other end of the spectrum, however, is one highly complimentary term for women, viz. the word angel – as, for example, in “Mei Chun is an angel”, “Moira sang like an angel from on high”, etc. Hold on there. There is one jarring note in the usage. Can a girl or woman be an angel? The word angel derives from Greek angelos “messenger” who, in ancient times, was invariably male; and the word was, from biblical times, applied to male personae, as witness “the angel Gabriel” (the name is masculine), “the archangel Michael” (again masculine name), and “the fallen angel Lucifer” (still another masculine name). Have we somehow got our terms or our genders mixed up?

Food for thought

Today women have come to the fore in all walks of life. They have made inroads, and rightly so, into niches which had previously been the preserves of men and they have not been found wanting. There has also been an awareness – nay, a call – for society to be less sexist in its use of expressions concerning women. In this regard, my favourite example concerns the use of the word chairman. Not too long ago, the term was gender-free, so that one addressed the chairman of a meeting as Mr Chairman or Madam Chairman as the case might be. Now, in deference to gender correctness, the person presiding over a meeting is a chairperson, and a person may be appointed as even a piece of furniture, viz. as the chair of an institution. I suppose it is now all right to address the said functionary as Mr Chairperson or Madam Chairperson – but what about Mr Chair or Madam Chair?

Again, in the interest of gender correctness, I wonder why nobody makes a fuss when a woman is designated as the director (not directress) of an institute or as the manager (rather than manageress) of a company; and in Malaysia nobody bats an eyelid when a woman elected to a state legislature is referred to as an assemblyman and not as an assemblywoman.

Since my article on the subject (“Genderness and tenderness”, MOE, March 21, 2008), I happily note the first-time appointment of women to ceremonial posts, viz. Ms Quentin Bryce as Governor-General of Australia, and Ms Manjula Hood as Lord Mayor of Leicester, England. (Incidentally, Ms, pronounced /muhz/, is a newly invented honorific to not specify the marital status of a woman.) Why, I wonder, were the positions not re-named Governess-General and Lady Mayoress, respectively? How, I wonder, does one address the latter as “My Lord Mayor” or “My Lord Mayoress” or “My Lady Mayor” or “My Lady Mayoress”?

Closing remarks

Don’t get me wrong. I subscribe to the view that women are intellectually equal to men, I’m all for women taking their rightful place alongside men in any milieu, and I agree that women “hold up half the sky”. I share the sentiments of the Maurice Chevalier character in the movie Gigi, when he sings, in his inimitable French accent: “Thank heaven for leetle girls / For leetle girls get beeger every da-a-ay” although I’m not so sure about that roguish glint in his eye.

I have put in much effort to prepare this article, differentiating between masculine and feminine where the context so requires. I just hope that this piece will not be looked on as bullshit (masculine) or cowdung (feminine)!

  • E-mail this story
  • Print this story
  • Bookmark and Share

Source:

Latest Jobs from Star-Jobs