Gender 101, Episode #12: Gender-Neutral Restaurant Etiquette (and socks!)

Our gender-variant friend Lucy continues their discussion with me about gender - how should wait staff address someone gender queer? (And check out the metaphor we worked with Lucy's socks!)



Thanks, Lucy!

Namaste,
Lee


ps - Yes, on editing this I did notice that I said "waiter" rather than "wait-person" or "wait-staff,' or "server" (the last is the one I think sounds best.) It's a reminder that this is a process and a journey, and it's okay to occasionally mis-speak. Being aware of the gender-bias in our language is a huge step... and the more we discuss this, the better we'll all get at it. Thanks for watching!

Some of the comments from the original post:

Lisa Jenn Bigelow said...
Totally awesome socks!

"Folks" is a word I've been trying to work into my daily vocabulary more as a gender-neutral alternative to "guys." It's hard! But every time I slip, I notice and kick myself, which feels like progress.

This video makes me rethink how I address kids at the reference desk, though. Sometimes I do say, "Yes, ma'am" or "What can I do for you, sir?" I tend to do this when *I* feel certain of a child's gender... but it doesn't really matter what *I* feel is "certain," does it? I could still be wrong.

Thanks, as always, for the great food for thought.
September 28, 2011 at 6:12 AM


Cynthia Leitich Smith said...
I say "folks" all the time. I'm glad that's a good choice.

In the south/southwest, you can probably also say "y'all."

Incidentally, since moving to Austin, I've also taken to saying "honey" as a reference to someone's significant other. As in, "So how is your honey doing now that the cast is off?" I wouldn't tend to do it north of Oklahoma, though.

I love how this blog makes me think, and by the way, I really enjoyed the video sample of your presentation.
September 28, 2011 at 7:51 AM


Lee Wind said...
Thanks Lisa and Cynthia,
I'm working hard to eliminate "guys" as my go-to term, and I'm so glad these discussions with Lucy are resonating!

And Lisa, yes, I think that's a really important insight - it's not about how sure WE feel of someone's gender identity, it's really their call... One of the interviews coming up in the series is with a fascinating individual who presents as a very masculine man with a lumberjack-style beard - and yet the gender of their mind is female.

And Cynthia, thanks for the kind words about my presentation - I love doing them and helping move us all forward!

Namaste,
Lee
September 28, 2011 at 8:02 AM


Angie said...
It's funny, I learned to say "you guys" when I was a little girl -- preschool age -- playing with a group of other little girls. This was back in the sixties, and we called each other "you guys" all the time, and certainly didn't mean males. [ponder] "Folks" works fine, though, and I actually say that occasionally. I'll have to pay attention and use it more often.

With words like "waiter" and "actor" and such, I'm all for just ditching the -ess variant and calling everyone by the root. A waiter is someone who waits on you. And actor is someone who acts. We used to use "paintress" and "sculptress" for a female painter or sculptor, but now everyone is a painter or sculptor regardless of gender. The words don't contain the blatantly gendered "man" particle, so declare them neutral and use them.

You can do the same thing with words like "stewardess." Instead of stuffing "flight attendant" into your mouth, go back to the original "steward" and call everyone that, regardless of gender. There you go, back to two syllables.

Angie
September 28, 2011 at 4:03 PM


maddox said...
As a gender-variant person I don't particularly mind the use of neutral terms, which also happen to be masculine, like guys, waiter, actor, etc.

I *do* mind when people call me ma'am or sir or ladies, because *that* is a) purposefully gendering someone, and b) it is a completely unnecessary gendering. The server who says "what you would like to eat ma'am" as already gone out of their way to gender me, when it could just as easily (or more) have been avoided.

Thanks for your videos Lee (and Lucy)!
September 30, 2011 at 10:54 AM

Gender 101 Episode Ten Redux: Gendered Words in our Language and Culture

Here's the next installment of our talks on gender with Benji, a Gender Queer Activist and an awesome new friend...



I adore these conversations with Benji. When editing this, I almost cut out the part where Benji says they don't know exactly how to pronounce "Mx." but then I realized it's one of the things I adore best about them and these discussions. Understanding that the lens with which we view gender is so rigid in our society, and the issues of gender conformity so broad-ranging, that even someone as plugged in and on top of things as Benji could have a moment/issue where they still had things to learn, too.

And I think that's a great thing to remember for all of us as we continue thinking about Gender within ourselves and our culture - that we can all continue to learn, and grow, and expand our world-views to embrace gender non-conformity.

Oh, and Benji wanted me to share with everyone that "honorific" was the word they intended to say, rather than "honorarium." No worries, I'm constantly having the wrong words pop out, too, to my kid's amusement (and my husband's eye rolls!)

Lucy also wrote in the comments to the original post that they found someone who pronounces Mx. as "mix." 

Namaste,
Lee

The "Gay" Life of a Kookaburra in Australia... And the opportunity in a word

Down Under there's this famous song, "Kookaburra Sits In The Old Gum Tree."

Here's the lyric...

Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree
Merry merry king of the bush is he
Laugh, Kookaburra
Laugh, Kookaburra
Gay your life must be.

So now a primary school in Australia has decided that their kids should sing that final line as "Fun your life must be."

The reason?

Garry Martin of Le Page Primary School in Melbourne decided to replace the song's last line "gay your life must be" with "fun your life must be" to end the laughter that erupted in the classroom when the children sang the word "gay."

..."Seventy years ago when the song was written 'gay' meant you are happy. Nowadays we know it's got all sorts of different meanings," Martin told Reuters.

I know the school's getting a lot of flack about this being too politically correct, or maybe just not politically correct enough, but what I wish had happened is that they'd talked with the kids about the word "gay."

Yes, "gay" can mean fun.

It can also mean a boy who falls in love with another boy. Or a girl who falls in love with another girl.

And sadly, "gay" has also become slang for "icky" or "bad" as in, "that's so gay."

If the song had been using the word "gay" in a negative way, I don't think I would have been upset about a change in lyrics to stop slamming down a minority.

Think of the racist songs that we no longer sing today (Yeah, Disney never did re-release "Song of the South," did they?)

But in this case, the use of the word "gay" has a good connotation. "Gay" can mean fun - and why are we protecting children from knowing THAT?

I'm glad to know that they're having second thoughts:

Due to the controversy, Martin said it might be better to revert to the original word "gay."

"I possibly should have stuck with the original and explained that in a tender, caring way," he said.

Because if the kids are snickering and laughing at the use of the word "gay" - that's a great opportunity to talk to them about how we gay people are just that - people.

And sometimes, our Gay lives are fun, too. Just like that Kookaburra.

Here's a video of a children's choir singing the song with the word "Gay" intact:




How do YOU think kids should sing the song?

Namaste,
Lee


Here's a link to the full news article.

The song was written by Australian teacher Marion Sinclair.