Language and women

"I can go on to tell you that I saw two major problems -- for women -- with
English and its close linguistic relatives. (1) Those languages lacked
vocabulary for many things that are extremely important to women, making it
cumbersome and inconvenient to talk about them. (2) They lacked ways to express
emotional information conveniently, so that -- especially in English -- much of
that information had to be carried by body language and was almost entirely
missing from written language. This characteristic (which makes English so well
suited for business) left women vulnerable to hostile language followed by the
ancient "But all I said was...." excuse; and it restricted women to the largely
useless "It wasn't what you said, it was the way you said it!" defense against
such hostility. In constructing Láadan, I focused on giving it features intended
to repair those two deficiencies."
Suzette Haden Elgin, linguist and author
(see her website here)

I have long been intrigued by the native tongue series of books by this author – I have read the first 2 books of the trilogy. They are based around the conviction that language helps construct reality , and that the lack of feminine input into language historically has therefore impoverished (or even damaged) culture. I certainly believe that language and culture interact with each other, that language is very powerful, and I wonder what changes to culture would occur with a female oriented language, though unlike the author’s perspective in the first 2 books – which I gather changed somewhat by the third - I am not sure it would accomplish redemption, for I think divine intervention is necessary!

I came across the quote above recently, and felt sympathy to the vulnerability of women to hostile language she speaks about – many many times I have known someone was using language in an aggressive or manipulative fashion, yet when asked to explain why, found it very difficult to form my perceptions into words that could be readily understood by the other – particularly when that other was male. Women were much more likely to immediately understand the hostile intent in language without needing an explanation. Though these gender distinctions do not always hold. So I was intrigued by the possibility that this comes about because of a language that isn’t geared towards female perception. I’ve had a look at the language she constructed and it does have words for things that you think ahhh yes, a word for that is good. For instance, it is a language rich in emotion words, for different types of love, anger, loneliness and so on. It is almost commonplace these days to see English as lacking in terms for love – that said, it does help you see the common thread between different love experiences – romantic love and love for your children have differences, and yet the intensity of feeling has a lot in common too.

If you look at the biblical world view, language is seen as of incredible importance. For instance , one title for Jesus is the Word. God creates by word. The Tower of Babel punishes human arrogance by the multiplication of languages so that they could not understand each other. I wonder whether one thing that makes us in the image of God (in distinction from animals) is that we have language. In a sinful world, language can be both illuminating and deceptive – it has power for good and evil.

Well, here you can see my first degree intersecting with my second (first honours in literature, then I did honours in theology).

Is the Easter bunny dropping by?

I had quite a few conversations about Santa (yay or nay? - in a nutshell - pretty much nay at our place - Santa is ackowledged as a nice story that isn't real) around Christmas, and today ran into my first Easter Bunny issue. Stuck in a long queue at the Post office (posting a birthday pressie to my twin - hello Addie!!!), a lady asked Sparky when the Easter Bunny was coming. Sparky looked very confused, and I suddenly realised we hadn't been talking about the Easter Bunny AT ALL .

This wasn't precisely intentional, it is just that the Easter Bunny isn't close to my heart. I don't remember ever believing in the Easter Bunny. My most vivid memory of the Easter Bunny is my father waking me up one Easter Sunday with the announcement "I have some good news, and some bad news. The bad news is the Easter Bunny is dead. The good news is your eggs were left before the Bunny died". Dad had gotten up to a dead bunny on the doorstep proudly deposited by our dog. Before you worry about my reaction, I was about 9-10 at the time and I thought this was the most hilarious thing ever - if a bit sad for the bunny. Usually Dad wakened us on Easter Sunday with the words Christ is Risen, but I guess he couldn't help himself that Easter after thinking up his quip.........

Anyway, I suddenly felt all confused and guilty myself. I hadn't prepared Sparky for this, and had no position or words ready! I quickly pointed to the chocolate stains around his face and said jokingly well the Bunny has already come today (he had been given eggs at preschool). She then seemed to be concerned at the lack of discipline of today's parents, that I couldn't keep the bunny until Sunday! I backtracked and explained that his eggs were waiting until Sunday, but this was at preschool. Afterwards, I made a comment to Sparky about the Easter Bunny coming on Sunday morning, and that this was the story we told. So I'm not sure what he makes of all this. We had only been talking to him about Jesus, even explaining eggs as being about new life, and suddenly out of nowhere bunnies hop into the picture! And now I'm wondering what he got told at preschool - it is a Christian one, so Jesus gets mentioned, but I'm not sure what gets said about bunnies.

So , people. What happens at your place at Easter re bunnies? (and chickens et al)

Good Friday introspection

Around this time of year I tend to engage in some self examination. I've been thinking lately about how you can love everybody. What often gets said by Christians is that love is an action, and so we choose to love in what we do, rather than necessarily feeling loving all the time. This is a good point, and yet I know that when people "love" me in that way I can often tell that they don't like me and that they are choosing to make an effort. I appreciate the effort, yet it makes me sad that they can't get over the negative feelings. So, I want to hold myself to a higher ideal - to make an attempt to see the good in people, to see the potential for good perhaps, and to try to have the feeling (if I can) as well as the action. That, I think - though very difficult - is the ideal. And meanwhile, yes, choose to love by action if I can't feel - but to do so so graciously that it doesn't come across as a gritted teeth EFFORT to love.

Boys' dreams

Sparky announced to me today, with a complete lack of originality for a boy, that when he grows up he wants to be a fireman. This follows on from his longheld desire to be a superhero. (I was a girly girl who wanted to be a ballerina and the like). It is easy to dismiss these dreams as just boyish bravado. Yet I a while ago I asked Sparky why he liked superheroes - expecting to hear that they are able to do anything, or are very strong. He told me he likes them because they help people. It struck me that this is something they have in common with superheroes. Is this something we downplay in our stereotyping of boys? That in their desire to be these kind of heroes, boys show an altruism very early on? We often these days see the desire to help as feminine. Sure, the heroism is active and public, and perhaps in that we see a masculine side to the altruism. But nevertheless, there are boys all over wanting to help and save people. What a pity that we tell them to be sensible instead. I don't know whether he will continue to want to be a fireman - the majority don't - but I hope he keeps that desire to help.

(and yes he does like Fireman Sam, and we have this toy!)

a big day

Just sharing the big triumph at our house today. Sparky has been toilet trained for over a year now but today had a first - he did the whole thing by himself without help either physical or verbal! You don't realise how many steps that is until you have to teach it - pull down pants, but don't pull them right off, get on seat - managing to get all relevant parts in, do it - all, not getting up half way through, wipe yourself, without removing copious amounts of paper from the roll, then put paper in toilet - not on floor, then flush - once, not several times , pull up pants - managing to get nothing folded over or stuck on the way, turn tap on, the cold one not the hot one, wet hands, then apply soap - not the entire container - rub and rinse hands, turn off tap and dry hands on a towel, not anything else that takes your fancy.
YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and a goal for the year is on its way!
(and yes I did poke my head unobtrusively around the door to see how it was going, and so could see that he was doing all the right things.)

People of the Book

I just finished reading the book of this title by Geraldine Brooks, who wrote the excellent March (Little women from the father's view). This book, as you might have guessed, is about Jews, Muslims and Christians. It centers around the story of an illuminated haggadah (Jewish prayer book) - which was saved by muslims. Based on some actual events, although she goes back and constructs a history for the book. I enjoyed it, though not as much as I thought I would - perhaps my expectations were too high! It was competent, but not exciting. She for the most part is fairly balanced in how she presents the adherents of each religion - though I think the Jewish people fare slightly better, though this might be expected as she converted to Judaism ( though I understand for the sake of her son of a Jewish father, so that he might be a Jew). The message is obvious - that different peoples, cultures and religious understandings enrich each other rather than detracting from each other. I might want to have a greater emphasis on truth, but nevertheless, the message that humans are at their best when they are able to care for and even sacrifice for, those different from themselves, is a good one. If you have read it, let me know what YOU think!

Latest Sayings

Sparky: I love you even when you are naughty Mummy
Owl: tee (tree), bic (biccie), key, pixer (picture)