On your first paragraph I have at no point claimed that you believed otherwise, and with regards to your second paragraph, from what I can understand from it, I think this is where it’s clear we just aren’t going to agree with regards to just how sexist words on their own can be without any semantics present in their utterance.

On the third paragraph you have very clearly misunderstood, or perhaps I haven’t articulated properly. I’m not telling you the use of a word is not going to go away so accept it, I’m saying that the right and proper way for these insults to be dealt with is with the background context (which you agree with) and to let natural evolution of language take its course. You claimed you didn’t want to live in a world where people stopped viewing certain words as offensively as you do, and while it is of course your right to keep hanging on to the negative connotations of the world, each generation to come will naturally strip it of its real slurs and make it more and more innocuous as time goes on (see the word gay used in insulting manners in modern language compared to 20 years ago, for a hyper-accelerated version of this natural progression). My point still stands on this matter, you’re living in a counter-productive dream land if you want to keep words having the same impact as an insult throughout all time, and in all honesty I have to wonder why you would object to the future absence of any sexist connotation from the word bitch because of it’s origins? Would you prefer more words existed that truly offended people despite the context their used?

It is not unreasonable to have an aversion to the female = insult scenario. Bitch, harpies, shrew, cunt, twat, these aren’t innocuous words, and the fact that you’re yelling it at an inanimate object doesn’t remove it from its sexist context. Nor does sidestepping away from using sexist name calling as a valid political criticism by merely apologizing for the particular ‘bad’ word used rather than the sexism.

I’m perfectly fine disagreeing with people, but not when they’ve already made up their mind what my stand is, and why it’s different from my own without consulting me. And, quite frankly, telling someone to suck it up or go live on another planet because that’s the way the world works baby, that’s been the pretty standard response by society to anyone who tries to question the status quo. It’s not funny, and it isn’t true. We all get to shape the society we live in, and the language we use to speak to each other.

I also am not eager to brush off the incident, which I’m glad you’ve given me ample opportunity to highlight my opinion once again. The incident is sexist, and deplorable, I just think the feminists and equality campaigners amongst us should focus less on the word “bitch”, which is clearly less important than the need to focus on the problem underlying its use, if they don’t want their views and the debate to be taken on a wild loop away from the main point as it has done here.

I disagree, you used the word in the context of bitch as someone (or in this case something) that ‘plays up’ or doesn’t behave the way you want it to. The word is used here in context.

I see your point and agree on how we can make the word less offensive. It does bother me though that you are so eager to brush off an incident when it is used in context as a sexist insult, so I’ll just have to disagree on this one point.

Then you might as well build a spaceship because that’s how language works and evolves. As for the following being sexist…

“No, it’s to do with her personality and ultra-aggressive policies. This isn’t a case of a ’strong woman’ automatically being called a bitch, she IS a heinous bitch.”

It certainly would sound like it is, but Steve B has been civil enough to explain and clarify what he’s talking about and has also made it clear that he has a distaste for the way pretty much all those US politicians are in a system he dislikes. Given his explanation afterwards I certainly don’t consider it to be a sexist use any more. Sometimes, as I think 60. has made pretty clear actually, insults get used because they are perceived to have genders. This still doesn’t make the insult itself sexist just because it is largely synonymous with being used against a specific gender. Steve could have used another word other than Bitch, but then you could have afforded the term bitch as worth no more worry than “arrogant prick”.

61. “Nobody says oh “bitch!” if they hit their thumb with a hammer.”

I, as a geeky computer gamer in my spare time, can often be found shouting “what a bitch” at the screen, so nerr But in all seriousness, I think we can’t get anywhere, myself included, with anecdotal arguments.

“Bitch is part of a double standard that puts down women for behaving in a way that is acceptable in men. I would say a male equivalent was more of the ‘nancy’ or ‘gay’ type of insult, as it puts men down for a set of behaviors that are seen as feminine.”

Which is why we need to tackle the issue of making it clear that it’s not an issue for women to act in the same manner as men. Solve that issue and the double standard disappears.

62. “It doesn’t matter what type of woman – all that collapses as irrelevant, because of the potency in our culture of telling a man he is like a woman.”

Once upon a time the term Gay was not an insult, yet then became one. Take queer if you want as another. There then was a time when this was the most insulting thing you could call a homosexual as an insult. Then generations passed and the term lost its potency, more generations passed and gay has all but lost any really offensive meaning towards homosexuals, has been embraced by the homosexual community and has pretty much got a separate definition of “unspecific insult”.

If at every generation stage we made as much of a fuss about what the word means as we’re making here about the word Bitch, it would never have evolved into the inconspicuous nature it now features. I still have to argue with people that do for some reason find the term “gay” used in the way of “Why is my car being so gay” highly offensive because of the “origins” of the term that due to the way different generations adopt the vocabulary their parents use you can’t argue about the origin of a word, only about what the word means to recent generations gone by.

By all means, I do feel I’ll have to agree to disagree with a lot of you mutually, but while you’re fighting to keep a word as offensive as possible so that you can persuade people to stop using it, I’ll be letting it naturally devolve into a generic insult that has no context on its own whatsoever as countless of other insulting words and phrases have done over centuries and millennia.

It isn’t ironic that the word is used in this context at all. As I pointed out above, when the word bitch is thrown at men, it is meant to be insulting because it associates them with being ‘like a woman’. It doesn’t matter what type of woman – all that collapses as irrelevant, because of the potency in our culture of telling a man he is like a woman.

As for bitch being a reclaimed word, this happens rarely. Bitch Magazine is one of the only successful examples. But all reclaimed words are only reclaimed in so far as they are used by the people they once helped to oppress. They can still be used in an aggressive, insulting manner by everyone else.

“1. Is “prick” a sexist insult? Or is it a gender-specific word one applies to a man when one wants to insult them? See also, “bastard”. (I’ve never heard a female called a bastard)”

Perhaps prick would be a sexist insult in an alternative non-patriarchal universe. It is important to remember that sexist, racist, homophobic, ablist, and transphobic language doesn’t occur in a vaccuum. It gets its potency from actual discrimination and power imbalances in society.

Prick would be a sexist insult if it was used against men for acting in a way that was ok for women, but not perceivably for men. As you have said it is used – along with words like tit, arse and cunt – as general purpose swear words not as specific insults for a person who behaves in a very specific way which would be acceptable was it not for their sex.

Nobody says oh “bitch!” if they hit their thumb with a hammer.

I don’t think cunt is that different to cock. I have only heard it used by men against men in the same context as cock or prick

Bitch is part of a double standard that puts down women for behaving in a way that is acceptable in men. I would say a male equivalent was more of the ‘nancy’ or ‘gay’ type of insult, as it puts men down for a set of behaviors that are seen as feminine.

Bastard however is an insult to your parentage so while you have heard it used on men more it is more gender neutral than that. Unless you see Bastard as a slur on the recipients unmarried mother in the same way as son of a bitch.

This is going to sound aggressive, I guess, but it’s not. Just a series of terse questions.

1. Is “prick” a sexist insult? Or is it a gender-specific word one applies to a man when one wants to insult them? See also, “bastard”. (I’ve never heard a female called a bastard)

2. I regularly use “cock” and “prick” as both general-purpose swearwords (”oh cock!”) and direct insults (”ah, ya prick!”). Should I stop using these words?

3. Why are “bitch” and “cunt” different to “bastard” and “cock”?

Ditto.

I know in my family it took the bunch of leftie liberals saying Nigger wasn’t an acceptable way to refer to people in order for it to stop being used. And this was long after the major victories of the Civil Rights movement. And being used by people who didn’t burn crosses on lawns.

I know those weren’t your words. I really meant those question marks around them. I was wondering what you were thinking a better response to the original use of bitch as a political criticism was.

>>”This has nothing to do with her political stance.”

No, it’s to do with her personality and ultra-aggressive policies. This isn’t a case of a ’strong woman’ automatically being called a bitch, she IS a heinous bitch.

I read this as sexist in language and intent, although possibly not consciously, because it is not entirely in vogue for liberals to be so blatantly sexist.

But yes, you’re right, Bitch should become non-gender specific, and I believe it is. I hear more often men refered to in some context’s as bitches, though again mostly in terms of homosexuality, but also to some straight men. I think this is the progression I talk about, but we’ll see.

Not exactly, what I’m trying to say is that society naturally becomes more accustomed to insulting words and phrases in such a way that they become more acceptable. The word “cunt” could not be uttered without causing intense shock a decade ago, thanks to comedy outlets it has now become almost acceptable to use within friendship circles. I fully expect the word to become used more and more over the next half a century until it is as inoffensive as “bastard” is now. We naturally acclimatise to the vocabulary created around us, to try and fight that and keep a word from becoming accepted as part of that course is just fighting the inevitable and missing the context of why that particular word gets used and the issue that needs to be fought more deeply behind it.

The fight against the word Nigger wasn’t done by a bunch of leftie liberals professing how nasty it was and how people shouldn’t use it, it was halted in its use (as the exception from evolving into acceptable) by fighting the issues of racism and social conflict. The more we fight present racism and multi-cultural tensions the less we’ll see the word used again.

And again the point is missed…

“But I don’t think that giving up ground (how do you suggest it? ‘Oh, well, calling a presidential candidate just a bitch as if that’s a credible criticism is okay, but you shouldn’t be biased against her because she’s a woman’?) will encourage anyone to think critically about themselves, just to dismiss us all the quicker.”

I didn’t say what you have paraphrased here. I said if a person has credible criticisms articulated in such a way it’s clear that they aren’t of a sexist nature, and happens to use the word bitch to describe her then that is not a sexist insult, and shouldn’t be taken as such. Why people should think any more critically than to articulate themselves to make it clear that they’re not making a sexist comment is beyond me, I think people should think more critically about how their interpreting things just as much.

Also in your example about the jewish person, the point is that it is unknown to the pork waver that his ‘victim’ is religious. But it is obvious in most cases that a woman is a woman.

As for my stress levels, I’m not stressed at all. I’m just aware that the use of bitch is synonimous with sexism.
Perhaps the answer is that bitch should be used to cover everyone, it would be a lot easier than banning it.

Bitch

What I think you’re trying to say is that rather than learn to not be sexist, people will adapt and find newer, more socially acceptable ways to express it. That is true. It is much easier to find a way to call a woman a bitch in a word that isn’t bitch than do to some self examination and find that despite supposedly liberal politics, much of our (everyone’s, we were all raised in the same cultural pigpen and are responsible for trying to climb out) thinking is deeply sexist and racist. But I don’t think that giving up ground (how do you suggest it? ‘Oh, well, calling a presidential candidate just a bitch as if that’s a credible criticism is okay, but you shouldn’t be biased against her because she’s a woman’?) will encourage anyone to think critically about themselves, just to dismiss us all the quicker. No one will change unless they want to, or until we have plugged up all the formerly acceptable ‘I’m not a bigot but’ escape routes and people are forced to start thinking of women as actual fellow human beings.

Case in point here.
I’m not reaching for the word “bitch” because she’s a woman, I’m doing it because she’s driving others to use “shrewish” and “harridan”.

This is so purposely obtuse. All are pejoratives. And she’s driving people to use them? Forcing them through her mean, bad, woman ways? I want to not be sexist, but she keeps making me by being so horrible?

If a man insults you because you’re a woman that is sexist, if a man insults you because you’ve done something he wishes to insult, and uses the word bitch, then that isn’t necessarily sexist. It may not be delivered because of any route in sexism, and the person delivering it may wish to just make his feelings about something completely gender unspecific about you known. But in these instances where it is the case, it is a tragedy that the victim can then make the insult sexist again by interpretation.

This issue resonates with me because it is important for society to take comments and statements as they are intended not as they are heard. If someone waves fresh pork infront of a Jewish person without thinking about it…purely doing it because he gestures his hands when annoyed…that person can either take it as intended, a simple unfortunate gesture meaning nothing, or he can take it to mean the originator is an antisemite.

It really should not be down to, in a world where we are not going to be able to alleviate passion to the degree that insults, certain levels of aggression, and heated discussion will no longer occur, the originator of a sentence being held responsible for anything more than articulating their point as clearly as possible without needing to censor themselves for every possible eventuality of misinterpretation along the line. We can all interpret insults from almost anything, and this is ultimately what I feel is happening in a *few* instances here.

I will repeat, I think most of the comments made against Clinton are done so because of misogyny in the system and media, but to also tar those not intending to make sexist comments and are judging Hillary along side her counterparts with the same brush, just because they happen to use the word Bitch, is almost puerile in my mind. Just stop getting hung up on words and get hung up on the semantics, you’ll save yourself a lot of stress.

that everyone must stop seeing the word as an insult to make it ineffective.

….pressed the send button too soon.

For example if I was in an all male environment and called a bitch then it doesn’t much matter if I find it offensive or not. If it is delivered as an insult and still understood to be one by those around me then I have been insulted in public and I am shamed.

Wow. Just wow. I can’t imagine the million ways in which you would state that women can be strong without being a bitch. I just can’t imagine.

See, Steve, I wasted my time responding to you because I thought there was a chance you might listen. Apparently, I was wrong. So, instead of continuing this debate, I’m going to stop requesting that you stop viewing her and calling her a bitch. What am I going to do instead? Well, I’m going to request that you keep calling her a bitch. Now, why on earth would I do such a thing? Well, it’s quite simple. I was planning on supporting Obama. However, every time I see Hillary attacked with such blatant sexism, it pushes me one step closer to not only voting for her, but towards campaigning for her. And guess what, Steve? I not only suspect, but know, that a lot of other American women are starting to feel the same way. So, go right ahead, keep calling her a bitch…

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2008/01/andy-women-back-clinton.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/us/politics/10women.html?_r=2&ex=1357707600&en=a988176797c94f1e&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

It is a simple fact that if all women suddenly were able to stop feeling that the word Bitch was something that was defined as being a sexist word then it would no longer matter what type of word it was. The issue here is that a candidate has been singled out for particular abuse for doing exactly as her counterparts do, and it would certainly seem to be based in the fact she’s a woman. This doesn’t mean the abuse is necessarily wrong in all instances if articulated and quantified, if people truly don’t like her way of handling politics that is fine, it’s just not fine if they don’t also say the same about the majority of other candidates across both parties.

What word is used to make it punchier is pretty much irrelevant as far as I’m concerned, the views of an individual are there regardless of if it is uttered out loud or just reverberated consciously in silence.

you say both

“She is the most right-wing Dem candidate. Electing her to just to get a Dem in does not represent anyone whose views are left of centre-right.”

“Not to directly change anything, if he’s in the minority, but to be heard and for the substantial opposition to a law to be noted.”

the second of those quotes shows you rightly understand that to be represented is not the same as getting your way

The first though, suggests that not getting your way means it isn’t worth being represented.

–

I can only assume you have written off the republicans for the next american election and imagine it to be a straight win for whoever gets the democrat nomination.

If you don’t think that then surely voting in clinton means getting a less right wing government than the republicans – which tehrefore represents the views of the left. (and the right who managed to ensure the left wisdely voted for a centre ground candidate).