The other day, when being instructed, I replied, ‘Yes, Master’. The person (lady) to whom I was talking did not respond to this well. She pointed out that, as she was a lady, it was inappropriate for me to refer to her as ‘master’, as master was a word used to denote males. I replied, with my apologises, that I was using the word ‘Master’ in the original Latin context to denote one who has authority, regardless of gender. Indeed, for those who are curious, it is only once the word entered the French language did it take on gender roles for, as you know, the French like to separate words into genders (note: how do you know if a table is male or female? Lift up the tablecloth and have a look).
My hesitance in using the modern female form of the word ‘Master’, ‘Mistress’, is that, with many words which have male and female denotations, the words gain connotations which are not often consistent. For example, a Master is known as a strong leader who demands respect. That so many people demand the word ‘Master’ in relation to other people (think slavery) or others thought of as inferior (think pet ownership) goes to suggest at the significance that this word can have in relation to the most pathetic of all of God’s creatures, the human ego. Likewise, the word ‘Mistress’, also has connotations not intended in the original formation of the word, yet, as the male form of the word was designed to show power, the female form is designed to show weakness, indeed the mistress may be the property of the master (think sexual politics; how a man can have a wife and a mistress, the mistress being something owned by the man and having connotations less than flattering).
One thing I have noted previously about a lot of what I call pseudo-feminism is how negative stereotypes created by language are embraced by those who call themselves, but who are not really, feminists. Let’s look at a couple of examples.
It has been said often that the worst thing that someone can be called is a c**t. This one word creates a level of perverse reaction not seen by any other word. Indeed, it is a word considered worse than others such as ‘slave’, ‘paedophile’, ‘rapist’ and other words which professional, and other, comedians use to create hilarity on mainstream TV shows such as Saturday Night Live (SNL) in America (note: for those who don’t know, SNL is a sketch comedy TV series which specialises at mocking people, not for substantive things, such as racism, misogyny etc. but rather for things like; oh look, that famous person talks funny, let’s mock them! oh look, that famous person suffered a personal indiscretion, let’s highlight it and humiliate them).
Let us consider the word c**t. What is a c**t? It is an informal term for female genitalia. You can see why it might be offensive to call someone genitalia, right? But the male equivalent, for example, a c**k, carries little or no connotations, indeed, some people in business, and other walks of life, want to be thought of as ‘BSD’ (Big Swinging Dicks), an early precursor to ‘Ballers’. So why is female genitalia considered so much more offensive than male genitalia, so much so that whilst male genitalia can have positive connotations (if you’ve been kicked in the head by a horse, that is), female genitalia cannot? The answer seems to be along the lines of gender bias, something supported by many pseudo-feminists.
Another example is the difference between male and female canines. To be a male canine, a ‘Dog’, is seen as the animal version of the BSD. A man who is promiscuous is called ‘A Dog’ as a flattering term. The best personification of this is in the excellent TV show Frasier, in which one of the characters, the host of the sports’ radio phone-in, is called Bulldog whose main shtick is that he barks at women and sleeps around. People rolls their eyes at him, but his behaviour is encouraged by the radio station, even when the owner is female. To call someone a ‘bitch’, a female dog, does not carry the positive connotations as being a ‘Dog’, nor are the ‘eye rolling’ aspects tolerated. Even if the word has entered the mainstream vernacular, for example the B word is often heard on TV and not just on the ‘we-have-no-stories-so-we-just-appeal-to-the-lowest-common-denominator’ shows such as Game of Thrones or Friends, but in everyday TV. The phrase is never used as a positive, rather it is considered a good put-down to say, ‘she is a bitch’, or that, ‘she is bitchy’, or that, ‘she was bitching’. However, it is important to note, that whilst the male form ‘Dog’ is used for a man who is promiscuous, the terms for a woman who is the same is much worse.
Attempts to rectify the gender imbalance in the mainstream are as idiotic as they are pointless. A new film I saw advertised is about a lady who pretends to be drunk to find ‘nice guys’ to take her home so she can accuse them of raping her to strike a blow for feminists everywhere. This, as you can see, is not feminism, it is hypocrisy, the female equivalent of the male version. The fact this is advertised as a great film is deeply concerning as it will move everyone further away from the equality which feminism is truly about, not creating division but creating equality so that, instead of relying on ‘affirmative action’, people will focus on people as they are not how they appear aesthetically. If people really wanted to create a more equal society they would first look at the building blocks of our reality, language, and either remove the stigma of words to create an equal meaning, or, even better, find other words to express themselves without having to rely on negative connotations to make their point, a point often not worth making.
‘till next time
thegreaterfool2016 