Lately I’ve been wondering what’s up with some suggesting to everyone how they should use language. I’m not saying that we should use language in a hurtful way, although that is open to interpretation. But if it is true I am my brother’s keeper, then too are they not my keeper as well? When I read something say on a message board I take it at face value. I’m not talking about things that are written like:
“Master and I were walking down the street and as we approached the corner I reached out to stop him from steeping off the curb because a car was coming.”
But if someone writes:
“Do masters have the right to expect total submission from their slaves?”
Really does it have to be spelled out to folks that by master the person may be talking about something from their perspective? Or it may just mean the person who is standing and not kneeling. Do we really care if the master being talked about is a woman?
I’m working with some people to start a group based on the leather part of the life. There’s a lot written about leather on the web as well as on some data bases that can be accessed for free through some libraries. Not to mention a plethora of books on leather, this would be a benefit to anyone’s personal library. That being said starting a group on the principals of leather and its history would mean that we would follow a code of brotherhood. Anyone can pledge for the group who has an interest in leather, learning about it and living by the code of brotherhood. I made the last suggestion, but was met with opposition about the word brotherhood. Because it doesn’t sound inclusive, I thought using the word anyone didn’t imply but said what I though included everyone.
So here’s my problem. If a homo sapien (which is to say people) can accept being a part of mankind later referred to as human kind, how could they not know that being apart of a brotherhood would also includes all people? Especially when in the same sentence the word Anyone appears? (This also begs the question should we petition the world to refer to everyone on the planet as person kind since both mankind and humankind have the word man in it? But we all know it means the homosapien kind) I understand that there are still some places and organizations that carter just to men hence brotherhood, but if we are going to follow in the steps of leather which was started by men sexual orientation aside, were some women were accepted and considered brothers. How could we not use that word? Any one who has done some research can understand wanting to use the term/phrase brotherhood. And if this is the case that I or anyone else should suggested that people use language that has to include everyyyyyyyyyyone means that as a woman when someone is trying to get me to join their organization they should make me feel welcome by including the fact that I’m not only a woman but an African American woman, who has Irish blood flowing in her veins, who’s great-great grand parents where a few who and I can trace this has ties to the indigenous people of this place called American, who also has ties to the freed slaves in the Carolinians and people who are referred to as Geechi, and over 40 years of age. That way I would feel like I’m getting a big hug! Can you hear the sarcasm? But those out there can rest assure that if I do decide to join something that I’ll know what it’s about before I out right make a judgment about a word that was used in the title.
To that end, the leather man handbook by Larry Townsend is a great read. It’s written by a gay man for gay men. I learned a lot of things I didn’t know and some things I did.
If you don’t have a problem with learning something new from the pages of a book give it a read. If you think it’s going to make you gay? Well..
