[techtalk] RE: [issues] Re: [grrltalk] Re: linuxchix logo

[Lothan]

> From: issues-admin at linuxchix.org [mailto:issues-admin at linuxchix.org]On
> Behalf Of Mary Gardiner
> Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 8:41 PM
> To: minae
> Cc: Grrltalk at Linuxchix. Org; issues at linuxchix.org
> Subject: [issues] Re: [grrltalk] Re: linuxchix logo
>
>
> On Sun, May 06, 2001 at 08:01:51PM -0700, minae wrote:
> > It seems to go well with the name
> > "Linuxchix" which sounds to me like it's trying to be a hip, catchy
> > young-sounding moniker.  Else why not Linux Women?
>
> Actually now that you bring this up, a lot of my feminist friends
> are rather
> unable to take the name seriously at all because of the use of
> the word 'chicks'
> and thought that we must have some formal position on reclaiming
> derogatory
> terms.
>
> Has anyone else ever had or encountered issues with the name?
>
> Mary.

This is kinda funny because I never really gave the name Linuxchix much
thought. But now that you mention it, I wouldn't be caught dead referring to
the female gender as chicks. I remember even in high school (eons and eons
ago) the girls didn't like to be referred to as chicks. Use of the term was
considered a quick and easy way to spend a Friday night at home alone.

On the other hand, I think these are confusing times for a lot of people.
For example, I was taught while growing up that you referred to someone as
sir or ma'am out of respect. I still remember those demanding drills in Boy
Scouts... Who sir, me sir? Yes sir, you sir. No sir, not me sir. Same drills
with the ma'am as well. It's heavily ingrained in my system and I often
automatically respond "yes, ma'am." These days it seems many women consider
ma'am to be derogatory as well.