[19316] in APO-L
Re: Toast song
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Quodomine, Thomas Register)
Thu Oct 8 07:50:57 1998
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 07:49:51 -0400
Reply-To: "Richard Quodomine, Thomas Register Rep. on Long Island" <trrdq@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
From: "Richard Quodomine, Thomas Register Rep. on Long Island" <trrdq@SPRINTMAIL.COM>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
> > 1. We are already "true to self and to each other", being "true to"
> > Alpha Phi Omega again is bad lyrically, uncreative and says nothing new.
>
> This never occurred to me... but it is no worse than "men of" which
> amounts to a pronoun.
No, its repetitive and far worse lyrically. No songwriter would imply being true to
something three times in one song over 2 verses, they'd find something new. The
repetition can only be good if the style demands it, such as gospel choral
arrangements behind the soloist. Otherwise, its poor writing. Further, where does the
"amounts to a pronoun" come from? A pronoun, as I understood it, is he, she it, they
or similar generic word standing in for people. "Men" is sybolic of humanity,
mankind, or what have you.
> Have there been other alternatives proposed before? What happened to
> them? "Joined in" comes to mind.
Oooh ... something actually creative. Should add spice to this debate.
> > 3. There is a great degree of PC Police in any change argument.
>
> Not necessarily. Our language has changed a lot since the writing of the
> Toast Song... one result being that "men" is no longer understood to be an
> equivalent for "people." That is why we have (had) TV shows called "The
> Secret Lives of Men" and "Men Behaving Badly." Men as in "male."
That's not a good argument. Men, as in mankind, as the brotherhood of man, as in man
shall bend sword into plowshare. All understood to be humanity, regardless of gender.
The Male stereotypes used in those two TV titles are about men, and thus use the
word. Just because men refers to the male gender/sex, does not mean it has lost its
meaning for humanity. Rather, those shows attempt to use gendered male stereotypes as
a selling point, having little to do with this argument.
> Of course *we* know that's not what we mean, but it may not be so clear to
> other people, college administrators, and most importantly new brothers.
So, its very simple: we take the time to explain it to them.
-- Richard Quodomine, again, his opinions are his own
