Georgiana Brummell

dandylover1@friendica.world

Hello. Georgiana Brummell is not my legal name, but it is what I prefer to be called. I chose it in honour of Beau Brummell. Some of my interests include studying dandyism, nineteenth-century grammar, Received Pronunciation, British history, and the Regency. I like coffee, tea, wine, nasal snuff, cooking, hot baths, reading British literature, watching nature and historical documentaries, old BBC radio shows, gardening, hot weather, and playing cards and dice. I also love cats. In classical music, I enjoy Baroque through a bit of early Romantic, while in popular, I usually prefer 1950's through 1970's, though acoustic recordings can also be fun. I love theatre, mostly English and Viennese operettas, Edwardian musical comedies), and some Regency/Georgian plays. I am a huge Ivor Novello fan. I prefer antique menswear and accessories (no feminine clothing). It's my dream to either buy a genuine Edwardian suit or have one commissioned. I love wit, wordplay, and dry humour without vulgarity. My parents are lesbians, and I am a huge gay rights supporter. I am happily childfree, and speak my mind. I have been totally blind since I was two months old, due to Retinopathy of Prematurity. I am also single and searching. If you are or know a genuine dandy, or at least, a single, childfree, intelligent, well-dressed man, preferably over sixty, please tell him about me. You can also find me on Dreamwidth

dreamwidth.org

Network Posts

New Jersey, USA

http://rel=mehttps://friendica.world/profile/dandylover1

Georgiana Brummell

2 days ago from TweeseCake •

Georgiana Brummell
2 days ago from TweeseCake •

As a grammar prescriptivist, I take writing and proper use of words very seriously. I recently saw a post about ending text messages with full stops. Apparently, some think this is a bad idea. No. It's called using punctuation correctly! Perhaps, they should read a few grammars instead of playing their silly video games! The same is true of netspeak, textspeak, corporate spaek, and abbreviating everything. Likewise, I have no use for political correctness. I refuse to use words such as visually-challenged, vertically-challenged, etc. I will say blind (or visually impaired if the person has some vision), short, fat, etc. Unless I'm writing poetry and am seeking flowery words for things, I call them what they are. Neither do I see any difference between saying "a blind person" and "a person who is blind", for example. I also have no time for so-called gender-neutral words, unless they honestly make sense and are actually descriptive, such as firefighter or police officer. But I'm just as likely to say fireman, policeman, waiter, steward, actor, chairman, etc. and change the gender when necessary. I refuse to use the singular they. There are two sexes (gender is for grammar). You're either one or the other. This absolutely doesn't mean that you can't change your sex. If, for example, I meet you as a woman and you change to a man or are a drag king/queen, I will certainly change my use of pronouns when discussing you or talking about you, either permenantly or temporarily, as the case requires. But unless you literally have multiple personalities or are a machine or an inanimate object, you are neither a they nor an it, and you're certainly not some made-up pronoun such as xe. I would never cause harm to those who use such words. I would just consider them to be silly or confused. If the sex is unknown, or if a sentence can apply to both sexes, I use the masculine, simply because it's grammatically correct to do so.

#English #gender #grammar #language #prescriptivism #properEnglish #sex #texting #writing

#sex #writing #english #language #gender #grammar #properEnglish #prescriptivism #texting

Linda Duval doesn't like this.

in reply to Georgiana Brummell

Linda Duval

in reply to Georgiana Brummell • 1 day ago •

I am the chairperson of an organisation and I'm not a chairman. You are more obsessed by your gramnar obsession than for the respect of the individuals. I am very certain that this should be the other way round.

At the end of the day, only humans use grammar. The use of grammar should focus on the respect of people.

in reply to Linda Duval

Georgiana Brummell

in reply to Linda Duval • 1 day ago from TweeseCake •

@lindaduval No, but you very well could be a chairwoman. I'm not against changing the gender of a word when necessary to match the sex of the individual. Language exists for a reason and so do conventions. It would be quite strange if everyone call things according to his own idea of what they should be named.

in reply to Georgiana Brummell

Linda Duval

in reply to Georgiana Brummell • 1 day ago •

I am the chaiperson of my organisation literally. Why do I want to pigeonhole myself? The chairperson terminology is valid and inclusive. Why should the focus be gender centric and exclusive?

I certainly rebel to the patriarchal society and will identity myself as a person, not a gender.

in reply to Linda Duval

Georgiana Brummell

in reply to Linda Duval • 1 day ago from TweeseCake •

@lindaduval There's nothing exclusive about simply saying what you are. It also makes things easier when people speak about you. It would make far more sense to say "I received a letter from the chairwoman yesterday and she told me" rather than "they told me". I am speaking about one person, not a group. What if you had a name that could be either male or female and I were writing to you? I could say "Dear Madam Chairwoman". Of course, I could also say "Dear Sir or Madam", but it's better to use a title. The former salutation is really if you don't know who will be receiving said letter. "Dear Linda" would be far too informal and quite disrespectful in a business context in any case.

in reply to Georgiana Brummell

Linda Duval

in reply to Georgiana Brummell • 1 day ago •

When people write to me, they simply use Dear Ms Duval or Dear Linda. Nobody has ever reported to me that they have struggled in finding an appropriate term.

Dear Sir or Madam are also acceptable when someone does not know the name of the person they are writing to. I would expect this to be rare since most people would make an effort to find out to whom they are writing to these days.

I sign my correspondence as Chair of (name of my organisation)

Georgiana Brummell likes this.

in reply to Linda Duval

Georgiana Brummell

in reply to Linda Duval • 1 day ago from TweeseCake •

@lindaduval @lindaduval Yes. In your case, Miss, Mrs. etc. makes sense. But if you had a name that could go either way or that was truly uncommon, just knowing it wouldn't help the writer decide which title to use. Fortunately, as you said, in your case, it's not a problem.

in reply to Georgiana Brummell

Linda Duval

in reply to Georgiana Brummell • 1 day ago •

Mrs is also an unacceptable term. There is no need for women to have to advertise whether they are married. There is only one term for men and it is Mr. Women should use Ms. Women really need to move on from the old Victorian patriarchal society that entrapped women into submission.

Again, if someone needs to write to the chaiperson of an organisation, the most respecful thing to do, would simply to find out to whom they are writing to.

in reply to Linda Duval

Georgiana Brummell

in reply to Linda Duval • 1 day ago from TweeseCake •

@lindaduval @lindaduval To whom they are writing. The extra "to" is redundant. I don't agree with all of these leftist/feminist/man-hating ideas that I've seen from various people, but from a grammatical point of view, the part about Mr. and Ms. does make sense. Either both sexes should have such titles to indicate marriage or there should be a single one for each. But I'm not so radical that I would abandon the old ones, and I myself am a Miss, though at forty-one, I very well may be a Madam. haha

in reply to Georgiana Brummell

Linda Duval

in reply to Georgiana Brummell • 1 day ago •

English is my 2nd language, so I stand corrected!

What is important is to recognise when language is used, or has been used to entrap women into 2nd class citizenship.

Being feminist is not the same as being man-haters. Being feminist is the force that empowers women to achieve equality.

Grammar and language, when used appropriately, is an additional tool that can help women ascend to equality.

By the way, I am enjoying this conversation very much!

in reply to Linda Duval

Georgiana Brummell

in reply to Linda Duval • 1 day ago from TweeseCake •

@lindaduval @lindaduval My sincere apologies. I always try to be gentle with non-native speakers. I must say, other than that tiny mistake, you write so well that I would never have guessed that English wasn't your first language! I am equal whether I subscribe to all of that or not. I don't need to be radical or to change the language in order to love myself, or to strive for the best, or to demand to be treated equally. I simply need to be, and I am.

in reply to Georgiana Brummell

Linda Duval

in reply to Georgiana Brummell • 1 day ago •

Your preferences are yours and you choose what you prefer. However, we live in a society where it is important to be aware where language can be detrimental to women.

The difference can be simply felt in how much you get paid compared to a man in the same role. Please search "gender pay gap" and you will find that in the legal industry, for example, men can earn as much as 59% more than a woman in the same role.

⇧