"Alder" (in "alderman") is from an Old English word meaning a "patriarch" with its root in the word "old." Sorry.
Since there seems no escaping linguistic sexism or ageism ("elder" anyone?) why not Councilor--they are male and female, old and young but they are all on a Council and give counsel (wise or otherwise)?
Good question. A consideration is how much can we expect to change language. For decades we have used "aldermen". Since would be small change, then a small but vocal group could be successful in making "alder" become the commonly used term after some years. If they went for a bigger change, it might not stick. Movements to change language have had variable impacts.
Yes, but "village elders" has been commonly used to mean village leaders - which, back in the day, usually meant the older, (usually) wiser, more experienced village inhabitants. Hence, the term "Alder" makes sense, in that the standalone use of "Elder" was common.
I love Jeff Biss’ comment. Be a good citizen and help your neighbors out. Why is it so difficult for people to do things for others? What a world we live in now.
The poll choices for what to call a city council member are limited, and bad.
I thought about councilor, but it will never consistently get spelled correctly and anything resembling "counselor" surely does not describe what these folks do. How about "council member." Same number of syllables as alderperson without making you dry heave saying it. Or for a more succinct term, how about "ward rep"? "Alder" in any form is archaic and should be retired
Helping others and being a part of the fabric of the community should be the norm, not an exception. Whether it's shoveling snow, hoping someone cross a street, helping someone put groceries in the trunk or whatever, is it so very hard to look out for or help someone?
That is true, but is beside the point of whether or not there should be government funding for snow shoveling. If we allocated public spending based on what would make the most sense if everyone behaved as they should, then we would need little or no law enforcement. And if there were any, then police would not carry guns.
The popularity of "dibsing" shoveled parking spots (whether you cleared them or not) points out the fatal flaw in this idea. Too many people don't buy into the idea that they "should" contribute.
Thank you for providing the link to WTTW's article on organizations to help migrants and other un-housed people. It is so hard to know what which charitable organizations put their money to efficient use toward their mission.
I guess you’re not interested in exploring your unconscious age biases, as you continue to justify them without reading This Chair Rocks. And including Trump in your argument for the validity of your bias is illogical. His behavior, values, and beliefs are abhorrent at any age!
I am surprised to read EZ write in favor of public money for private snow shoveling service instead of snow shoveling done by a government agency. Wouldn't the private snow shoveling cabal be biased against those who have the most challenging shoveling needs?
I realize there are space limitations to the PS, but thought I would re-post my comment on President Biden being complicit, so the readers get an uncherrypicked version:
"Trump may well be more corrupt than Biden. Probably is. But to say that any accusation of Biden being corrupt is a "Fox News shrieking point unsupported by any evidence" is unfair and again naive at best.
Biden: "Have you ever spoken to your son about his overseas business dealings"? "No"
OK, Your son makes $11mm dollars dealing with Ukraine and China over 5-year period. You play golf with him and his business partners. You attend lunches with him and his business associates. You are on conference calls with him and his business associates. What father has no idea when a troubled son is making $11 million dollars? Being VP and the head of US diplomatic efforts in Ukraine, he should have been aware even if by some miracle he wasn't!"
George W was made aware when Jenna got an underage drinking ticket at Texas. If by some chance President Biden wasn't aware, wouldn't one of his people say "Hey, Hunter's being paid $11mm from a country you head diplomatic efforts for??
Never heard the "dancing eyebrows" before but assume it's not a compliment. :)
I realize this second link is far from neutral, but the quotes are accurate...
Of course Junior Bush found out that his daughter got a ticket for underage drinking, as that's what happens when a child gets caught doing that.
But maybe Joe Biden just decided he would go with his so & do things with him & the son's business associates & not ask questions about it, because he knew it could cause him political problems, so he stayed hands off!
It's appalling that because T**** is a life-long, flat out criminal, all the Re Thug Licons believe Biden is also a criminal!
What does "complicit" mean to you here, though? There is no illegal activity alleged re. Business dealings other than Hunter’s failures to pay taxes. Trading on one’s last name and the potential value of one’s family connections is not a crime and is fairly common.
Complicity implies wrongdoing— so what did Biden do wrong?
You are correct. I did not realize that "complicit" had to be illegal activity. I looked up synonyms and will use "involved" or "connected by participation".
It should not be "fairly common" to help your son get millions of dollars for sitting on the board of a company in the Ukraine when you are Vice President of the United States and the head of diplomatic relations to that country.
And on the point that he received no money. I would prefer money going to my kids than to me and I'm a ways from 80.
Neither of those links have any evidence that Biden benefitted personally from Hunter’s business dealings or, critically, that he took any official actions — abused his position — to advance his son’s interests. That’d be a high crime or misdemeanor and Biden would deserve impeachment & removal from office if the offenses were anything other than trivial. Yet Republicans who have their panties in a bunch over this seem not to give one single solitary crap about Trump’s criminality, fraudulence, etc.
Sorry if you felt your comment was "cherry picked."
It's funny. I post on right blogs trying to make my points on right to choose, banning of assault rifles, January 6th, the $34 trillion deficit, politicians making millions, the far right and of course Trump.
I post on left blogs about too much federal government, George Floyd protests, $34 trillion deficit, politicians making millions, wokeness, the far left and Biden.
I try to use hard numbers as often as I can, never get too personal, and try to appeal to what I feel is the preponderance of evidence. I find that most people see only what they want to see and often comment on things that are not said. I'm sure I too am guilty.
Will continue to subscribe and read the PS and comments to try to broaden my perspectives. David O
You still provide zero evidence that Biden was complicit in any way. Innuendo doesn’t count. Put your bias aside and wait for any evidence rather than make unfounded allegations.
Dude, we've been moving away from gendered terminology for many years now, where have you been? Flight attendants, mail carriers, firefighters, servers. Do you still say "comedienne" and "authoress"?
Garry, I think you are in right forum which has plenty of grumpy old men. I am not that old yet, but I am clearly on my way.
I think what is at issue is how strongly a term implies a gender, and thereby becomes exclusionary. Of course, this depends on what people are used to and we do not all have the same background. IMO, "alderman" as the standard generic term of a member of a city council that represents a ward strongly implies that such a person is male. Using alderman as a generic term insinuates that a person holding such office ought to be male. For those who think public office should be open to any gender identity, then changing the term is helpful. Growing up I was thought that "actor" and "actress" were specifically male and female, respectively. However, I have heard the term "actor" used in a gender neutral sense enough times that I have dropped that association. But I can understand that someone who has lived long enough with the gendered meaning of those terms, and I would not presume there is any ill intent on using them as such.
My take is the issue is in a different category than arbitrary word policing, which has been discussed in this forum (e.g. Jason Kilborn story).
Why is it stupid to call women who act “actors”? Don’t women who are in movies, television, and the theater act? They do, so they are actors. Many gendered terms are used to imply that women have less agency and power than men. The term actor really exudes agency and power. “An actor on the world stage.” The term actress does not. Did you ever hear someone described as “an actress on the world stage”? The obsession on the part of some men to use gendered terms is really a sign that they are clinging to the 1950s era patriarchal expectations relating to gender.
Yes, I do. She has said that developing a capacity for empathy has given her the ability to “feel the exquisite living pleasure of transmitting (a character’s) feelings to an audience. It’s an actor’s singular joy.”
I also believe the use of actor and actress in the awarding of film and stage trophies continues this ancient divide/status of recognition, including music artists as well.
I'm suburban so my opinion on what to call alderwomen and aldermen counts for little. But didn't the late great Mike Royko sometimes refer to them as aldercreatures? That always made me laugh.
David L., not every proposed plan to serve people is some kind of lefty conspiracy. I think we can propose a plan to clear sidewalks and research the pros and cons without being secret communists. Look how we already had an excellent suggestion to support citizen efforts because someone said, "let's look into this."
Hi Lynne - Thank you for your reply and sharing your thoughts. However, for clarification it is important to note that I did not in any way suggest anything was a conspiracy, nor did I suggest that anyone was a Communist. I simply stated that the proposal for municipal takeover of snow shoveling of private properties was a very bad idea that would look good only through a leftist ideology perspective that favors government taking over more and more of our everyday functions in life.
Your poll on Alder-variations has too few choices. I vote for “Councilor” which is (a) gender neutral, (b) a real word, and (c) appropriately descriptive of someone who serves on a Council. By your logic, we would be calling restaurant servers “waits” and the people who put them out “fires”. We use “Officers” so as not to have to use “Policepersons”. Use Councilors!
I’m not following the logic on visual tweets. Your rule used to be that they were funny visuals taken from the real world, and evidence of contrivance would disqualify them. Now, almost all the visual tweets are manufactured rather than observed (and mostly, therefore, less funny). Another sign of the decaying X-verse, I suppose, but EZ, what are the criteria?
the visual TotW's today were outstanding! i looked at the 1st [Jesus saves], burst out laughing, and thought surely it would get my vote ... until i looked at the 2nd [drawing of mom], burst out laughing, almost to tears. showed it to my wife, she burst out laughing too.
and 2 of the last 3 were also VG. a jackpot this week.
I agree with EZ completely on plastic water bottles -- drive me crazy because of their effect on the environment. Many years ago (OK, 2008) I was co-president of the high school PTO and the discussion was (believe it or not) on treats provided teachers at their monthly all-staff meeting. In the end, treats were eliminated (took too long to get the meeting going) and the solution was to just supply water bottles. I suggested we instead provide pitchers of ice water and teachers / staff could bring their own mugs from their rooms. You'd have thought I suggested giving them poison. NO ONE agreed with me, at least publicly.
At our request, my school hired a provider of large water container refill stations the staff could use at need, at no cost to us. They've become quite popular.
"Alder" (in "alderman") is from an Old English word meaning a "patriarch" with its root in the word "old." Sorry.
Since there seems no escaping linguistic sexism or ageism ("elder" anyone?) why not Councilor--they are male and female, old and young but they are all on a Council and give counsel (wise or otherwise)?
Good question. A consideration is how much can we expect to change language. For decades we have used "aldermen". Since would be small change, then a small but vocal group could be successful in making "alder" become the commonly used term after some years. If they went for a bigger change, it might not stick. Movements to change language have had variable impacts.
Yes, but "village elders" has been commonly used to mean village leaders - which, back in the day, usually meant the older, (usually) wiser, more experienced village inhabitants. Hence, the term "Alder" makes sense, in that the standalone use of "Elder" was common.
I love Jeff Biss’ comment. Be a good citizen and help your neighbors out. Why is it so difficult for people to do things for others? What a world we live in now.
The poll choices for what to call a city council member are limited, and bad.
I thought about councilor, but it will never consistently get spelled correctly and anything resembling "counselor" surely does not describe what these folks do. How about "council member." Same number of syllables as alderperson without making you dry heave saying it. Or for a more succinct term, how about "ward rep"? "Alder" in any form is archaic and should be retired
Helping others and being a part of the fabric of the community should be the norm, not an exception. Whether it's shoveling snow, hoping someone cross a street, helping someone put groceries in the trunk or whatever, is it so very hard to look out for or help someone?
That is true, but is beside the point of whether or not there should be government funding for snow shoveling. If we allocated public spending based on what would make the most sense if everyone behaved as they should, then we would need little or no law enforcement. And if there were any, then police would not carry guns.
The popularity of "dibsing" shoveled parking spots (whether you cleared them or not) points out the fatal flaw in this idea. Too many people don't buy into the idea that they "should" contribute.
My point exactly.
Thank you for providing the link to WTTW's article on organizations to help migrants and other un-housed people. It is so hard to know what which charitable organizations put their money to efficient use toward their mission.
I guess you’re not interested in exploring your unconscious age biases, as you continue to justify them without reading This Chair Rocks. And including Trump in your argument for the validity of your bias is illogical. His behavior, values, and beliefs are abhorrent at any age!
You mentioned this book a week ago, was it, and you think everyone has run right out to read it?
I was hoping they would!
People have lives.
I am surprised to read EZ write in favor of public money for private snow shoveling service instead of snow shoveling done by a government agency. Wouldn't the private snow shoveling cabal be biased against those who have the most challenging shoveling needs?
I realize there are space limitations to the PS, but thought I would re-post my comment on President Biden being complicit, so the readers get an uncherrypicked version:
"Trump may well be more corrupt than Biden. Probably is. But to say that any accusation of Biden being corrupt is a "Fox News shrieking point unsupported by any evidence" is unfair and again naive at best.
Biden: "Have you ever spoken to your son about his overseas business dealings"? "No"
OK, Your son makes $11mm dollars dealing with Ukraine and China over 5-year period. You play golf with him and his business partners. You attend lunches with him and his business associates. You are on conference calls with him and his business associates. What father has no idea when a troubled son is making $11 million dollars? Being VP and the head of US diplomatic efforts in Ukraine, he should have been aware even if by some miracle he wasn't!"
George W was made aware when Jenna got an underage drinking ticket at Texas. If by some chance President Biden wasn't aware, wouldn't one of his people say "Hey, Hunter's being paid $11mm from a country you head diplomatic efforts for??
Never heard the "dancing eyebrows" before but assume it's not a compliment. :)
I realize this second link is far from neutral, but the quotes are accurate...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/analysis-hunter-bidens-hard-drive-shows-firm-took-11-million-2013-2018-rcna29462
https://oversight.house.gov/blog/joe-biden-lied-at-least-15-times-about-his-familys-business-schemes/
Of course Junior Bush found out that his daughter got a ticket for underage drinking, as that's what happens when a child gets caught doing that.
But maybe Joe Biden just decided he would go with his so & do things with him & the son's business associates & not ask questions about it, because he knew it could cause him political problems, so he stayed hands off!
It's appalling that because T**** is a life-long, flat out criminal, all the Re Thug Licons believe Biden is also a criminal!
"not ask questions about it, because he knew it could cause him political problems..."
That's the man I want as President!
I never called President Biden a criminal, just complicit.
If I recall, Jenna Bush called her dad and told him. Good move, 'cause it was all over CNN the next day.
What does "complicit" mean to you here, though? There is no illegal activity alleged re. Business dealings other than Hunter’s failures to pay taxes. Trading on one’s last name and the potential value of one’s family connections is not a crime and is fairly common.
Complicity implies wrongdoing— so what did Biden do wrong?
You are correct. I did not realize that "complicit" had to be illegal activity. I looked up synonyms and will use "involved" or "connected by participation".
It should not be "fairly common" to help your son get millions of dollars for sitting on the board of a company in the Ukraine when you are Vice President of the United States and the head of diplomatic relations to that country.
And on the point that he received no money. I would prefer money going to my kids than to me and I'm a ways from 80.
"Help your son get millions of dollars..." The only help that Joe Biden apparently gave his son was to give him his last name.
Neither of those links have any evidence that Biden benefitted personally from Hunter’s business dealings or, critically, that he took any official actions — abused his position — to advance his son’s interests. That’d be a high crime or misdemeanor and Biden would deserve impeachment & removal from office if the offenses were anything other than trivial. Yet Republicans who have their panties in a bunch over this seem not to give one single solitary crap about Trump’s criminality, fraudulence, etc.
Sorry if you felt your comment was "cherry picked."
It's funny. I post on right blogs trying to make my points on right to choose, banning of assault rifles, January 6th, the $34 trillion deficit, politicians making millions, the far right and of course Trump.
I post on left blogs about too much federal government, George Floyd protests, $34 trillion deficit, politicians making millions, wokeness, the far left and Biden.
I try to use hard numbers as often as I can, never get too personal, and try to appeal to what I feel is the preponderance of evidence. I find that most people see only what they want to see and often comment on things that are not said. I'm sure I too am guilty.
Will continue to subscribe and read the PS and comments to try to broaden my perspectives. David O
You still provide zero evidence that Biden was complicit in any way. Innuendo doesn’t count. Put your bias aside and wait for any evidence rather than make unfounded allegations.
Regarding aldermanic terminology, actresses are frequently referred to as "actors". What's the big deal? Linda Catalano
It's just stupid to call an actress an actor!
Dude, we've been moving away from gendered terminology for many years now, where have you been? Flight attendants, mail carriers, firefighters, servers. Do you still say "comedienne" and "authoress"?
I still use comedienne, but never even heard of authoress.
I still use stewardess, fireman & waitress!
You are old school, sir. I will not tell my editrix.
Garry, I think you are in right forum which has plenty of grumpy old men. I am not that old yet, but I am clearly on my way.
I think what is at issue is how strongly a term implies a gender, and thereby becomes exclusionary. Of course, this depends on what people are used to and we do not all have the same background. IMO, "alderman" as the standard generic term of a member of a city council that represents a ward strongly implies that such a person is male. Using alderman as a generic term insinuates that a person holding such office ought to be male. For those who think public office should be open to any gender identity, then changing the term is helpful. Growing up I was thought that "actor" and "actress" were specifically male and female, respectively. However, I have heard the term "actor" used in a gender neutral sense enough times that I have dropped that association. But I can understand that someone who has lived long enough with the gendered meaning of those terms, and I would not presume there is any ill intent on using them as such.
My take is the issue is in a different category than arbitrary word policing, which has been discussed in this forum (e.g. Jason Kilborn story).
I do.
Why is it stupid to call women who act “actors”? Don’t women who are in movies, television, and the theater act? They do, so they are actors. Many gendered terms are used to imply that women have less agency and power than men. The term actor really exudes agency and power. “An actor on the world stage.” The term actress does not. Did you ever hear someone described as “an actress on the world stage”? The obsession on the part of some men to use gendered terms is really a sign that they are clinging to the 1950s era patriarchal expectations relating to gender.
Actress doesn't mean powerful?
Tell that to Meryl Streep!
She is a powerful actor. And I’m sure she refers to herself as an actor.
You have absolutely no idea how she refers to herself!
Yes, I do. She has said that developing a capacity for empathy has given her the ability to “feel the exquisite living pleasure of transmitting (a character’s) feelings to an audience. It’s an actor’s singular joy.”
https://www.princeton.edu/news/2006/12/01/meryl-streep-talks-about-mysterious-art-acting
I also believe the use of actor and actress in the awarding of film and stage trophies continues this ancient divide/status of recognition, including music artists as well.
I'm suburban so my opinion on what to call alderwomen and aldermen counts for little. But didn't the late great Mike Royko sometimes refer to them as aldercreatures? That always made me laugh.
I'm reminded of Molly Ivins, blessed be her memory, referring to members of the US Congress as 'congress-critters.'
Haha, I'd forgotten about her. She is fun to read.
She used to narrate some her own audio books. That was great!
David L., not every proposed plan to serve people is some kind of lefty conspiracy. I think we can propose a plan to clear sidewalks and research the pros and cons without being secret communists. Look how we already had an excellent suggestion to support citizen efforts because someone said, "let's look into this."
Hi Lynne - Thank you for your reply and sharing your thoughts. However, for clarification it is important to note that I did not in any way suggest anything was a conspiracy, nor did I suggest that anyone was a Communist. I simply stated that the proposal for municipal takeover of snow shoveling of private properties was a very bad idea that would look good only through a leftist ideology perspective that favors government taking over more and more of our everyday functions in life.
Your poll on Alder-variations has too few choices. I vote for “Councilor” which is (a) gender neutral, (b) a real word, and (c) appropriately descriptive of someone who serves on a Council. By your logic, we would be calling restaurant servers “waits” and the people who put them out “fires”. We use “Officers” so as not to have to use “Policepersons”. Use Councilors!
I’m not following the logic on visual tweets. Your rule used to be that they were funny visuals taken from the real world, and evidence of contrivance would disqualify them. Now, almost all the visual tweets are manufactured rather than observed (and mostly, therefore, less funny). Another sign of the decaying X-verse, I suppose, but EZ, what are the criteria?
the visual TotW's today were outstanding! i looked at the 1st [Jesus saves], burst out laughing, and thought surely it would get my vote ... until i looked at the 2nd [drawing of mom], burst out laughing, almost to tears. showed it to my wife, she burst out laughing too.
and 2 of the last 3 were also VG. a jackpot this week.
I really, really wanted to vote for both Jesus and mom. I'm still going back and forth - not sure I voted for the right one.
About your poll on alders: since they serve on the City Council, why not call them councilors?
I agree with EZ completely on plastic water bottles -- drive me crazy because of their effect on the environment. Many years ago (OK, 2008) I was co-president of the high school PTO and the discussion was (believe it or not) on treats provided teachers at their monthly all-staff meeting. In the end, treats were eliminated (took too long to get the meeting going) and the solution was to just supply water bottles. I suggested we instead provide pitchers of ice water and teachers / staff could bring their own mugs from their rooms. You'd have thought I suggested giving them poison. NO ONE agreed with me, at least publicly.
At our request, my school hired a provider of large water container refill stations the staff could use at need, at no cost to us. They've become quite popular.