stay-at-home mom?

[micky]

How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?




The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
house wife?

I don't have this problem with the phrase "same-sex marriage",
probably becaues it's only two words and one hyphen, and it's
alliterative. Even t hough there is an easy alternative, "gay
marriage".

[Phil L]

micky wrote:
> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>
>
>
>
> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
> house wife?
>

Because she may not be married, or she could be married, IE a wife, but had
no children.

It's all self explanatory really..

[Cheryl]

I'm used to it, although it doesn't seem quite satisfactory. I think the
problems with housewife is that the speaker wants to focus on full-time
housewives with children and that 'housewife' itself is sometimes
assumed to refer to a very low-status occupation, one that can easily be
carried out during the ads in the afternoon soap operas.

Anyone who has actually been or tried to be a successful housewife will
know that it requires a lot of work and skill to keep a home clean and
pleasant, with all the mundane work done well and in good time - the
cleaning, shopping, cooking budgeting, taxi-ing, bill-paying, gardening,
overseeing repairs.They'll still get 'Oh, so you're just a housewife?'
while the speaker looks for someone interesting to talk to.

I once very briefly tried to be a housewife. I'm glad there are other
options.

--
Cheryl

[micky]

On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:35:54 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:

>On 2012-08-03 1:09 PM, micky wrote:
>> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
>> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>> house wife?
>>
>> I don't have this problem with the phrase "same-sex marriage",
>> probably becaues it's only two words and one hyphen, and it's
>> alliterative. Even t hough there is an easy alternative, "gay
>> marriage".
>>
>
>I'm used to it, although it doesn't seem quite satisfactory. I think the
>problems with housewife is that the speaker wants to focus on full-time
>housewives with children and that 'housewife' itself is sometimes
>assumed to refer to a very low-status occupation, one that can easily be
>carried out during the ads in the afternoon soap operas.

I'm 65 and I've never thought that. And my mother was home every
day until I was 13 (except one day when I was 9 she went 50 miles
away to see a doctor and that was the day I jumped off a 10-foot wall
(for the third time) and broke my leg. Actually she left after I
went to school and was back before I would have been home, if I hadn't
been in the hospital.)

And after 13 she had a job for a couple years where she worked maybe 5
hours a week.

>Anyone who has actually been or tried to be a successful housewife will
>know that it requires a lot of work and skill to keep a home clean and
>pleasant, with all the mundane work done well and in good time - the
>cleaning, shopping, cooking budgeting, taxi-ing, bill-paying, gardening,
>overseeing repairs.They'll still get 'Oh, so you're just a housewife?'
>while the speaker looks for someone interesting to talk to.
>
>I once very briefly tried to be a housewife. I'm glad there are other
>options.

Housewife is just one option. Getting away from 3 words is my goal.
How about "homey mom" or "homemom" . (Probably shouldn't use
"ho-mom".

Maybe stay-at home will someday morph into one word. That would be
good, but let's speed it up. How about statome mom?

Maybe something about "mom" bothers me.

How about statomemother or staitomother.

[Cheryl]

On 2012-08-03 2:31 PM, micky wrote:

>
> I'm 65 and I've never thought that. And my mother was home every
> day until I was 13 (except one day when I was 9 she went 50 miles
> away to see a doctor and that was the day I jumped off a 10-foot wall
> (for the third time) and broke my leg. Actually she left after I
> went to school and was back before I would have been home, if I hadn't
> been in the hospital.)
>
> And after 13 she had a job for a couple years where she worked maybe 5
> hours a week.

> Housewife is just one option. Getting away from 3 words is my goal.
> How about "homey mom" or "homemom" . (Probably shouldn't use
> "ho-mom".
>
> Maybe stay-at home will someday morph into one word. That would be
> good, but let's speed it up. How about statome mom?
>
> Maybe something about "mom" bothers me.
>
> How about statomemother or staitomother.
>

'Housewife' is a particularly misleading option if you want to refer to
women caring for children at home, because a housewife might have no
children, or adult children with homes of their own.

I can't think of a shorter way to say 'mother who stays home with her
children' than 'stay-at-home mother'.

--
Cheryl

[Guy Barry]

"micky" <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:n60o18tf2kr5sus4m...@4ax.com...

> I'm 65 and I've never thought that. And my mother was home every
> day until I was 13 (except one day when I was 9 she went 50 miles
> away to see a doctor and that was the day I jumped off a 10-foot wall
> (for the third time) and broke my leg. Actually she left after I
> went to school and was back before I would have been home, if I hadn't
> been in the hospital.)
>
> And after 13 she had a job for a couple years where she worked maybe 5
> hours a week.

I know this is completely off-thread, but why all the figures? "9" and "5"
in particular look completely out of place to me. (I note you didn't write
"for the 3rd time", by the way.) It's not so bad for two-digit numbers,
especially ones like "65" that need a hyphen, but I think rewriting in words
looks a lot better:

"I'm sixty-five and I've never thought that. And my mother was home every
day until I was thirteen (except one day when I was nine she went fifty
miles
away to see a doctor and that was the day I jumped off a ten-foot wall
(for the third time) and broke my leg. [...] ) And after thirteen she had
a job
for a couple years where she worked maybe five hours a week. "

[And later:]

> Housewife is just one option. Getting away from 3 words is my goal.

That should definitely be "getting away from three words". I note you
didn't write "housewife is just 1 option".

--
Guy Barry

[Glenn Knickerbocker]

On 8/3/2012 1:26 PM, Guy Barry wrote:
> didn't write "housewife is just 1 option".

"1" is reserved for the first character of online advertising
expressions like "1 weird trick."

¬R

[Iain Archer]

Cheryl wrote on Fri, 3 Aug 2012

Did "wannabe" or "staycation" ever have well-established fuller
ur-forms from which they mutated?
--
Iain Archer

[John Varela]

It's been my understanding that good usage is to spell out
single-digit numbers and to use numerals for others unless the first
word of a sentence.

--
John Varela

[John Varela]

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:13:07 UTC, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:

> 'Housewife' is a particularly misleading option if you want to refer to
> women caring for children at home, because a housewife might have no
> children, or adult children with homes of their own.
>
> I can't think of a shorter way to say 'mother who stays home with her
> children' than 'stay-at-home mother'.

The "at" could be dropped: "Stay-home mother".

No one has mentioned that these days a stay-home mother may be
home-schooling, an occupation that wasn't contemplated when
"housewife" was standard.

Another term that was in use 60+ years ago was "homemaker".

--
John Varela

[R H Draney]

micky filted:

>
>How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>
>
>
>
>The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
>sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>house wife?

What if she lives in an apartment?...r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Bill McCray]

Or in Britain, a flatwife.

Bill in Kentucky

[micky]

On 3 Aug 2012 19:39:41 GMT, "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net>
wrote:

I like that. Others might oppose it because it doesn't include those
who don't cook or clean.

[James Hogg]

Luxury! What about a holeinthegroundwife?

--
James

[Glenn Knickerbocker]

On 8/3/2012 3:37 PM, John Varela wrote:
> It's been my understanding that good usage is to spell out
> single-digit numbers and to use numerals for others unless the first
> word of a sentence.

The rule my high-school English books gave was to spell out anything
less than 20. CMoS says to spell out anything under 100. AP and APA
style guidelines both say under 10. All give exceptions for large and
small numbers that occur together.

ŹR

[Stan Brown]

On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 11:39:51 -0400, micky wrote:
>
> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>

> Why can't she be called a
> house wife?

She used to be, of course. But then someone decided that
"housewife" was pejorative because it implied somehow that "women's
work" was not as valuable as "men's work". So the politically-
correct crew had to come up with a new term.

--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com

[Nasti J]

On Aug 3, 8:39 am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. .    Why can't she be called a
> house wife?

Because she's not married to a house.

[Peter Moylan]

On 04/08/12 01:39, micky wrote:
> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>
> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
> house wife?

I've heard "full-time mother". Most of them seem to be single mothers,
so "housewife" wouldn't work.

--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.

[tony cooper]

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 18:30:19 -0400, Stan Brown
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 11:39:51 -0400, micky wrote:
>>
>> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>>
>> Why can't she be called a
>> house wife?
>
>She used to be, of course. But then someone decided that
>"housewife" was pejorative because it implied somehow that "women's
>work" was not as valuable as "men's work". So the politically-
>correct crew had to come up with a new term.

In the US, we seem to have far too many Homeless Wives.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Cheryl]

On 03/08/2012 10:45 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/08/12 01:39, micky wrote:
>> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>>
>> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
>> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>> house wife?
>
> I've heard "full-time mother". Most of them seem to be single mothers,
> so "housewife" wouldn't work.
>

That's a new one for me. I can't imagine how anyone can be a part-time
mother. No one stops being a mother (or a father) when the child spends
time in school or even in the custody of the other parent. And they
remain a mother or father even after the child is grown up and moves out.

Surely a housewife is a woman in charge of a household, so even a single
mother could well be a housewife.

I don't know what you call it if the housewifely duties are shared among
all the family members old enough to contribute, and no one stays home
in the day. Maybe then there is no longer a housewife; maybe whoever
organizes everyone's efforts is the housewife. Or househusband, but
that's a term I don't hear much any more.

--
Cheryl

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/12 1:13 AM, Cheryl wrote:

> 'Housewife' is a particularly misleading option if you want to refer to
> women caring for children at home, because a housewife might have no
> children, or adult children with homes of their own.

As has already been stated, the problem with any form of "wife" is that
the woman may not be married. Your version below is at least a bit more
formal than the original.

>
> I can't think of a shorter way to say 'mother who stays home with her
> children' than 'stay-at-home mother'.
>


--

Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/12 3:39 AM, John Varela wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:13:07 UTC, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>
>> 'Housewife' is a particularly misleading option if you want to refer to
>> women caring for children at home, because a housewife might have no
>> children, or adult children with homes of their own.
>>
>> I can't think of a shorter way to say 'mother who stays home with her
>> children' than 'stay-at-home mother'.
>
> The "at" could be dropped: "Stay-home mother".
>
> No one has mentioned that these days a stay-home mother may be
> home-schooling, an occupation that wasn't contemplated when
> "housewife" was standard.

She might also be an author, or she might be doing secretarial work on
her computer or she could be doing high-level research or she could just
be a prostitute. There are all sorts of things a woman could get up to
at home, but it does depend on how old the children are and how well
trained they are.


--
Robert Bannister

[Peter Moylan]

On 04/08/12 11:25, Cheryl wrote:

> Surely a housewife is a woman in charge of a household, so even a single
> mother could well be a housewife.

Etymologically, yes, but in today's English everyone assumes that a wife
must be married.

[Guy Barry]

"Glenn Knickerbocker" <No...@bestweb.net> wrote in message
news:ZpydnXwV5_dN3YHN...@bestweb.net...

Certainly I tend to write numbers up to twenty in full. After that my usage
varies: I think I tend to write "21" more often than "twenty-one", but
"thirty" more often than "30". I think it partly depends on whether I'm
talking about a precise number or a round figure.

It annoys me sometimes when a rigid house style is followed, though. For
instance the Guardian newspaper consistently used to write things like
"children between the ages of nine and 11", presumably because their house
style stipulated that numbers ten and above should be written in figures.
Another thing that annoys me is the rigid use of "never use numerals at the
start of a sentence", so you get things like

Nineteen sixty-nine was the year when man first walked on the moon.

This just looks silly in my opinion. At least it could be rephrased as "The
year 1969 was when..."

--
Guy Barry

[James Hogg]

No more than a fishwife has an ichthyan spouse.

--
James

[GordonD]

"James Hogg" <Jas....@gOUTmail.com> wrote in message
news:jvheth$dj5$1...@dont-email.me...

She was evicted. Now she's a septictankwife.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland

"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."

[GordonD]

"John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-eziWVk5OjZkq@localhost...

Somewhere around the house is a Style Guide for BT Managers, which agrees
with this.

[GordonD]

"Cheryl" <cper...@mun.ca> wrote in message
news:a83bvn...@mid.individual.net...

> On 03/08/2012 10:45 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 04/08/12 01:39, micky wrote:
>>> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>>>
>>> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>>> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
>>> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>>> house wife?
>>
>> I've heard "full-time mother". Most of them seem to be single mothers,
>> so "housewife" wouldn't work.
>>
>
> That's a new one for me. I can't imagine how anyone can be a part-time
> mother. No one stops being a mother (or a father) when the child spends
> time in school or even in the custody of the other parent. And they remain
> a mother or father even after the child is grown up and moves out.

That's the thought that crosses my mind when I read in the papers that some
celebrity has "become a father again".

[Guy Barry]

"GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:a844tr...@mid.individual.net...

> "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-eziWVk5OjZkq@localhost...

> > It's been my understanding that good usage is to spell out
> > single-digit numbers and to use numerals for others unless the first
> > word of a sentence.
>
> Somewhere around the house is a Style Guide for BT Managers, which agrees
> with this.

I think writing out telephone numbers in words would be a bit extreme!

--
Guy Barry

[Daniel James]

In article <6srn18p3rsklturr7...@4ax.com>, Micky wrote:
> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?

It sounds very American.

I think the nearest British equivalent would be "full-time mum" (or
mother). I prefer that as it recognizes (a) that being a mother is no
holiday, and (b) that being a mother involves many activities that are
not performed solely in the home (such as ferrying the little darlings
between home and school, to and from their friends houses, to and from
out-of-school activities (sporting and other gatherings).

"Stay-at-home" completely fails to capture the element of unpaid taxi
driver!

Cheers,
Daniel.
Glad NOT to be a parent!

[Bill McCray]

On 8/3/2012 10:16 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/08/12 11:25, Cheryl wrote:
>
>> Surely a housewife is a woman in charge of a household, so even a single
>> mother could well be a housewife.
>
> Etymologically, yes, but in today's English everyone assumes that a wife
> must be married.

But then there's midwife.

Bill in Kentucky

[Stan Brown]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 11:15:10 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
>
> On 04/08/12 01:39, micky wrote:
> > How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
> >
> > The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
> > which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
> > sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
> > house wife?
>
> I've heard "full-time mother".

((shudders))

As opposed to someone who is only a mother for part of the time?
Yuck!

[Arcadian Rises]

On Aug 3, 9:48 pm, Robert Bannister <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> On 4/08/12 3:39 AM, John Varela wrote:
>

I don't believe "stay-home" refers to employed, or even free-lance
moms.

Why not call them "unemployed moms?"

[Don Phillipson]

"micky" <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message

news:6srn18p3rsklturr7...@4ax.com...

> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. .

Your intuitions are swimming against the tide. Journalists have for
some decades agreed to transform descriptive phrases that usually
followed a noun into hyphenated or compound adjectives that precede
a noun. We used to talk about children at risk (of becoming juvenile
delinquents, sexually active, dropping out, drug addicts etc.) It is
nowadays fashionable to talk about at-risk children. Notably:
1: This usage does not prompt us to inquire about the
actual risk (e.g. dropping out or drugs or something else.)
It appears binary, viz. divides all children into two neat
classes, those at risk and those not.
2. The usage is thus appealing to social scientists and
politicians (who want people to believe (a) they understand
the situation adequately and (b) they can control it. All
the citizen need do is give them money.

(We used to think risk was the "human condition," viz. a domain
of uncertainty that affects us all, more or less and from time to
time. When we talk about at-risk populations we suggest this is a
known class, to which some belong but you and I do not.)

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

[Don Phillipson]

"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1TTSr.432499$IP4.1...@fx26.am4...

>> And after 13 she had a job for a couple years where she worked maybe 5
>> hours a week.
>
> I know this is completely off-thread, but why all the figures? "9" and
> "5"
> in particular look completely out of place to me. (I note you didn't
> write
> "for the 3rd time", by the way.) It's not so bad for two-digit numbers,
> especially ones like "65" that need a hyphen, but I think rewriting in
> words
> looks a lot better:

US newspapers agreed many decades ago on the style rule that all
numbers from one to nine should be spelled and those from 10 upwards
should be written in numerals. Most other printers/publishers follow the
same rule. Its familiarity enables contrarian use for advertising purposes
e.g. "3 trips you must make . . ." Because we subconsciously expect
"three" we may pay more attention to "3."

[Cheryl]

On 03/08/2012 11:46 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
> On 04/08/12 11:25, Cheryl wrote:
>
>> Surely a housewife is a woman in charge of a household, so even a single
>> mother could well be a housewife.
>
> Etymologically, yes, but in today's English everyone assumes that a wife
> must be married.
>

I don't think that works here. I must ask some people, but I don't break
'housewife' down literally like that.

And if I did, she'd be married to the house.

But, on the other hand, a golf widow wasn't married to a game and also
has a living husband.

--
Cheryl

[tony cooper]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 13:30:41 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>In message <VA.0000069...@me.invalid>

>It also implies some sort of laziness. I hate the term.

I can't see this at all. My wife was a stay-at-home mom. She didn't
stay at home at all...she was often off to the supermarket,
chauffeuring the kids around, shopping at the mall, or off doing
whatever the day required.

But, "stay at home mom" precisely described that she 1) did not have a
job outside the house, and, 2) cared for one or more children. It
was, and as far as I know remains to be, a fixed expression that
everyone hearing or seeing would absolutely understand.

It's only in venues like aue that there's any ambiguity about the
meaning of the phrase unless it's a conversation between an American
and a person from a country where the phrase is not used.

My daughter-in-law is a working mom. Again, that's a phrase with a
fixed meaning that no one should have a problem understanding. It
doesn't mean that she is a mom who works as opposed to other moms who
do not work because being a mom and wife is not work.

Implications based on terms with fixed meaning, or idiomatic
expression, are fodder for columnists, language forums, or
commentators like the late Andy Rooney, but the meanings are
crystal-clear in ordinary use.

There's one...crystals are not clear. Some are opaque, but I've never
seen a clear crystal.

[CDB]

"Marry in haste, repent at WHAT?"

[CDB]

On Aug 3, 1:01 pm, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

[How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?]
.....
>
> Maybe stay-at home will someday morph into one word.  That would be
> good, but let's speed it up.  How about statome mom?
>
In contrast to "runagate mom"?

> Maybe something about "mom" bothers me.
>
> How about statomemother or staitomother.

A stabile (in contrast to "a mobile") of the household.

[micky]

That's great. I'll use that from now on.

[micky]

Unless he was hit by lightning on the course when he raise his iron.
Then she'd be a real golf widow with no husband.

[micky]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 11:15:10 +1000, Peter Moylan

<inv...@peter.pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 04/08/12 01:39, micky wrote:
>> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>>
>> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
>> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>> house wife?
>
>I've heard "full-time mother". Most of them seem to be single mothers,

I like that better too. Only one hyphen, and full-time is an
established phrase.

Cheryl, Stan, sure a mother or father is one all the time, but s/he is
not spending her time doing it. When I'm a full-time employee of
Macy's, I'm still their employee even when I'm out shopping or home
sleeping, but it's whether I'm contracted for 40 hours a week or more
than determines if I'm full-time or not.

So for a mother with no other job than tending to chilldren and
keeping the house, which fwiw also benefits the children, it's
reasonable to call her a full-time mother and not say that about
others. .


So that means I'll be calling them full-time mothes or unemployed
moms.

[GordonD]

"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message

news:4g5Tr.540015$2z2....@fx19.am4...

Easier in the old days when exchanges had names!

Whitehall one-two-one-two...

[Robin Bignall]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 07:49:13 -0700 (PDT), CDB <belle...@gmail.com>
wrote:

At the wedding breakfast.
--
Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England

[tony cooper]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 16:18:14 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>In message <qbcq18to1fd3om9ri...@4ax.com>

> tony cooper <tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 13:30:41 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
>> <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>>It also implies some sort of laziness. I hate the term.
>
>> I can't see this at all.
>

>What'd you do today?
>
> Oh nothing, just stayed at home.
>
>You lazy bum, why didn't you go out and do something?

You can't separate a saying and work with the remaining part.

What's the meaning of "saves nine"?

[Bill McCray]

Okay - that's twice you've sent me out to look up something within
minutes. The first was SWMBO. For this one I found at Wikipedia "A
wedding breakfast is a dinner given to the bride, bridegroom and guests
at the wedding reception that follows a wedding in the United Kingdom."
Is the name based upon this being the first meal as a married couple?
Otherwise, I can't think of why it might be called a breakfast.

Bill in Kentucky

[Orlando Enrique Fiol]

NONONO...@bigfoot.com wrote:
>How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>
>The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a

>sentence, and because it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>house wife?

She may be a single mother who stays at home and hence no one's housewife. Or, she may be the half of
a lesbian couple that stays at home to raise children. She may also be in a cohabitational
relationship for which the term housewife would be a misnomer.

Orlando

[John Varela]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 01:48:49 UTC, Robert Bannister
<rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:

> On 4/08/12 3:39 AM, John Varela wrote:

> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:13:07 UTC, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> 'Housewife' is a particularly misleading option if you want to refer to
> >> women caring for children at home, because a housewife might have no
> >> children, or adult children with homes of their own.
> >>
> >> I can't think of a shorter way to say 'mother who stays home with her
> >> children' than 'stay-at-home mother'.
> >
> > The "at" could be dropped: "Stay-home mother".
> >
> > No one has mentioned that these days a stay-home mother may be
> > home-schooling, an occupation that wasn't contemplated when
> > "housewife" was standar
d.
>
> She might also be an author, or she might be doing secretarial work on
> her computer or she could be doing high-level research or she could just
> be a prostitute. There are all sorts of things a woman could get up to
> at home, but it does depend on how old the children are and how well
> trained they are.

Your examples are all paid positions. Our next-door neighbor is a
lawyer who works out of her house -- and when the children were
pre-schoolers she had a woman come in for day care. Our
ex-daughter-in-law is a successful author of books for teenagers who
works from home. I wouldn't call either of them a stay-at-home
mother. On the other hand, I would call a woman who stays at home to
teach her own children a stay-at-home mother.

--
John Varela

[John Varela]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 14:56:41 UTC, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:

You might get some resistance from those who consider that to imply
that the stay-at-home mother doesn't work.

--
John Varela

[John Varela]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 16:14:31 UTC, "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com>
wrote:

> "Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:4g5Tr.540015$2z2....@fx19.am4...
> >
> > "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > news:a844tr...@mid.individual.net...
> >> "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> >> news:51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-eziWVk5OjZkq@localhost...
> >
> >> > It's been my understanding that good usage is to spell out
> >> > single-digit numbers and to use numerals for others unless the first
> >> > word of a sentence.
> >>
> >> Somewhere around the house is a Style Guide for BT Managers, which agrees
> >> with this.
> >
> > I think writing out telephone numbers in words would be a bit extreme!
>
>
> Easier in the old days when exchanges had names!
>
> Whitehall one-two-one-two...

PEnnsylvania six five thousand.
or
PEnnsylvania six five oh-oh-oh.

--
John Varela

[Robin Bignall]

I can't do any better than the Wikipedia article, Bill. It just
occurred to my cynical nature that if you marry in haste, just about the
first occasion to regret the experience is immediately afterwards, at
the breakfast.

She Who Must Be Obeyed was popularised by Rumpole, but She is actually
Ayesha, the immortal leader of an African tribe, invented by Rider
Haggard. She comes to a fiery end.

[Robin Bignall]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 13:19:17 -0400, tony cooper

<tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 16:18:14 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
><g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
>>In message <qbcq18to1fd3om9ri...@4ax.com>
>> tony cooper <tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 13:30:41 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
>>> <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>>>It also implies some sort of laziness. I hate the term.
>>
>>> I can't see this at all.
>>
>>What'd you do today?
>>
>> Oh nothing, just stayed at home.
>>
>>You lazy bum, why didn't you go out and do something?
>
>You can't separate a saying and work with the remaining part.
>
>What's the meaning of "saves nine"?

As a punch line it's no great shakes but it has me in stitches.

[John Varela]

Here is a picture of one:
http://mineralsciences.si.edu/hope.htm

--
John Varela

[Rich Ulrich]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 10:44:36 -0400, tony cooper
<tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]

>
>Implications based on terms with fixed meaning, or idiomatic
>expression, are fodder for columnists, language forums, or
>commentators like the late Andy Rooney, but the meanings are
>crystal-clear in ordinary use.
>
>There's one...crystals are not clear. Some are opaque, but I've never
>seen a clear crystal.

I always related that to a crystal wineglass.
Clear. Expensive. Fragile.

--
Rich Ulrich

[Arcadian Rises]

On Aug 4, 3:17 pm, "John Varela" <newla...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 14:56:41 UTC, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com>

> John Varela- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Not really. Theere are different angles: the opposite of "working
mother" is "non-working", but also "unemployed mother".
OTOH, "stay-home" may imply just sitting idle.

[Arcadian Rises]

On Aug 4, 3:10 pm, "John Varela" <newla...@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 01:48:49 UTC, Robert Bannister
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> > On 4/08/12 3:39 AM, John Varela wrote:

> > > On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:13:07 UTC, Cheryl <cperk...@mun.ca> wrote:
>
> > >> 'Housewife' is a particularly misleading option if you want to refer to
> > >> women caring for children at home, because a housewife might have no
> > >> children, or adult children with homes of their own.
>
> > >> I can't think of a shorter way to say 'mother who stays home with her
> > >> children' than 'stay-at-home mother'.
>
> > > The "at" could be dropped: "Stay-home mother".
>
> > > No one has mentioned that these days a stay-home mother may be
> > > home-schooling, an occupation that wasn't contemplated when
> > > "housewife" was standar
> d.
>
> > She might also be an author, or she might be doing secretarial work on
> > her computer or she could be doing high-level research or she could just
> > be a prostitute. There are all sorts of things a woman could get up to
> > at home, but it does depend on how old the children are and how well
> > trained they are.
>
> Your examples are all paid positions.

Right, they are all self-employed, including the one who works in the
oldest profession, unless she works for a ,hm, manager.

> Our next-door neighbor is a
> lawyer who works out of her house -- and when the children were
> pre-schoolers she had a woman come in for day care. Our
> ex-daughter-in-law is a successful author of books for teenagers who
> works from home. I wouldn't call either of them a stay-at-home
> mother. On the other hand, I would call a woman who stays at home to
> teach her own children a stay-at-home mother.
>
> --

[Bill McCray]

"Nonworking mother" doesn't seem right, because that job is a lot of
work. "Unpaid mother" seems to me to be closer to the truth.

Bill in Kentucky

[micky]

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 18:26:41 +0100, "Guy Barry"
<guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"micky" <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:n60o18tf2kr5sus4m...@4ax.com...
>
>> I'm 65 and I've never thought that. And my mother was home every
>> day until I was 13 (except one day when I was 9 she went 50 miles
>> away to see a doctor and that was the day I jumped off a 10-foot wall
>> (for the third time) and broke my leg. Actually she left after I
>> went to school and was back before I would have been home, if I hadn't
>> been in the hospital.)

>>
>> And after 13 she had a job for a couple years where she worked maybe 5
>> hours a week.
>
>I know this is completely off-thread, but why all the figures? "9" and "5"
>in particular look completely out of place to me. (I note you didn't write
>"for the 3rd time", by the way.) It's not so bad for two-digit numbers,
>especially ones like "65" that need a hyphen, but I think rewriting in words
>looks a lot better:

You're right. I hope I wouldn't do this in normal writing. Thanks
for reminding me not to. I guess I consider newsgroups unnormal
writing, so I use LOL, WADR, AFAICT, and icon smiley thingies, etc.
that I don't use in anything more formal.

>"I'm sixty-five and I've never thought that. And my mother was home every
>day until I was thirteen (except one day when I was nine she went fifty
>miles
>away to see a doctor and that was the day I jumped off a ten-foot wall
>(for the third time) and broke my leg. [...] ) And after thirteen she had
>a job
>for a couple years where she worked maybe five hours a week. "
>
>[And later:]
>
>> Housewife is just one option. Getting away from 3 words is my goal.
>
>That should definitely be "getting away from three words". I note you
>didn't write "housewife is just 1 option".

One is an easy word to type. :-) And it's a word I learned to
write before I learned sixty-five. "One is the simplest number that
you ever know."

[micky]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 09:40:50 +0100, "Guy Barry"
<guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:a844tr...@mid.individual.net...
>> "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-eziWVk5OjZkq@localhost...
>
>> > It's been my understanding that good usage is to spell out
>> > single-digit numbers and to use numerals for others unless the first
>> > word of a sentence.
>>
>> Somewhere around the house is a Style Guide for BT Managers, which agrees
>> with this.
>
>I think writing out telephone numbers in words would be a bit extreme!

And I'll tell you what else is bad. Having script house numbers,
maybe above the garage door. I don't think they're especially
elegant, and when I'm driving down the street, I can't read them, at
least not without stopping or crashing. A good house number is
3112, not thrity-one twelve..

[micky]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 17:14:31 +0100, "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com>
wrote:

>"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:4g5Tr.540015$2z2....@fx19.am4...
>>
>> "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
>> news:a844tr...@mid.individual.net...
>>> "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>> news:51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-eziWVk5OjZkq@localhost...
>>
>>> > It's been my understanding that good usage is to spell out
>>> > single-digit numbers and to use numerals for others unless the first
>>> > word of a sentence.
>>>
>>> Somewhere around the house is a Style Guide for BT Managers, which agrees
>>> with this.
>>
>> I think writing out telephone numbers in words would be a bit extreme!
>
>
>Easier in the old days when exchanges had names!
>
>Whitehall one-two-one-two...

BUtterfield 8, six six one oh. My actual number, the first year
in college.

[micky]

On 4 Aug 2012 19:22:21 GMT, "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net>
wrote:

Drum roll.

[micky]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 09:53:06 -0400, "Don Phillipson"
<e9...@SPAMBLOCK.ncf.ca> wrote:

>"Guy Barry" <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message

>news:1TTSr.432499$IP4.1...@fx26.am4...

>
>>> And after 13 she had a job for a couple years where she worked maybe 5
>>> hours a week.
>>
>> I know this is completely off-thread, but why all the figures? "9" and
>> "5"
>> in particular look completely out of place to me. (I note you didn't
>> write
>> "for the 3rd time", by the way.) It's not so bad for two-digit numbers,
>> especially ones like "65" that need a hyphen, but I think rewriting in
>> words
>> looks a lot better:
>

>US newspapers agreed many decades ago on the style rule that all
>numbers from one to nine should be spelled and those from 10 upwards
>should be written in numerals. Most other printers/publishers follow the
>same rule. Its familiarity enables contrarian use for advertising purposes
>e.g. "3 trips you must make . . ." Because we subconsciously expect
>"three" we may pay more attention to "3."

Those little devils.

[micky]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 10:44:36 -0400, tony cooper
<tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:

>

>>> "Stay-at-home" completely fails to capture the element of unpaid taxi
>>> driver!
>>
>>It also implies some sort of laziness. I hate the term.
>
>I can't see this at all. My wife was a stay-at-home mom. She didn't
>stay at home at all

So she was a fraud? Was this embarrassing at parties?

>...she was often off to the supermarket,
>chauffeuring the kids around, shopping at the mall, or off doing
>whatever the day required.

counterarguments snipped.

[Nasti J]

On Aug 4, 9:18 am, Lewis <g.kr...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <qbcq18to1fd3om9rig97upm08rj7of1...@4ax.com>

>   tony cooper <tony.cooper...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > There's one...crystals are not clear.  Some are opaque, but I've never
> > seen a clear crystal.
>

> A crystal class is clear.

Is that where one is taught to sparkle?

[bubba@bubba..com]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 13:36:22 -0400, Bill McCray
<billm...@mindspring.com> wrote:

Except on holidays and festive days, it's customary for a Jewish
bride and groom to fast on the day of their wedding, and there is
plenty written about that, but the word "breakfast", otoh, for the
meal that follows this fast is rare even for Jews -- I had never
heard it but I found one Jewish, passing reference to "wedding
breakfast" with Google -- so I don't know how it could make it into
general British English. There must be some other source. And I've
never heard it in American English.at all.


>Bill in Kentucky

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/12 9:33 PM, Arcadian Rises wrote:
> On Aug 3, 9:48 pm, Robert Bannister <robb...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>> On 4/08/12 3:39 AM, John Varela wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:13:07 UTC, Cheryl <cperk...@mun.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>> 'Housewife' is a particularly misleading option if you want to refer to
>>>> women caring for children at home, because a housewife might have no
>>>> children, or adult children with homes of their own.
>>
>>>> I can't think of a shorter way to say 'mother who stays home with her
>>>> children' than 'stay-at-home mother'.
>>
>>> The "at" could be dropped: "Stay-home mother".
>>
>>> No one has mentioned that these days a stay-home mother may be
>>> home-schooling, an occupation that wasn't contemplated when
>>> "housewife" was standard.
>>
>> She might also be an author, or she might be doing secretarial work on
>> her computer or she could be doing high-level research or she could just
>> be a prostitute. There are all sorts of things a woman could get up to
>> at home, but it does depend on how old the children are and how well
>> trained they are.
>>
>> --
>> Robert Bannister
>
> I don't believe "stay-home" refers to employed, or even free-lance
> moms.
>
> Why not call them "unemployed moms?"
>

Because they might have a job that they do from home - taking in
washing, ironing, sewing to designing aircraft.

--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/12 4:40 PM, Guy Barry wrote:
> "GordonD" <g.d...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:a844tr...@mid.individual.net...
>> "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:51W5y0sPNk52-pn2-eziWVk5OjZkq@localhost...
>
>>> It's been my understanding that good usage is to spell out
>>> single-digit numbers and to use numerals for others unless the first
>>> word of a sentence.
>>
>> Somewhere around the house is a Style Guide for BT Managers, which agrees
>> with this.
>
> I think writing out telephone numbers in words would be a bit extreme!

Then the writer must avoid beginning a sentence with one. I occasionally
find myself wanting to start a new sentence with an abbreviation like
"I.e." before I realise that this would be an offence to the language.


--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 5/08/12 12:14 AM, GordonD wrote:

>
> Whitehall one-two-one-two...

As soon as you said that I could hear the Dick Barton theme music.
--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/12 9:15 AM, Peter Moylan wrote:

> On 04/08/12 01:39, micky wrote:
>> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>>

>> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a

>> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>> house wife?
>
> I've heard "full-time mother". Most of them seem to be single mothers,
> so "housewife" wouldn't work.
>

I think that is one of the best, least offensive and least misleading
descriptions.

--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 5/08/12 12:20 AM, Lewis wrote:
> In message <lfeq181mlragsnc10...@4ax.com>
> micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 11:48:44 -0230, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>
>>> On 03/08/2012 11:46 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>>> On 04/08/12 11:25, Cheryl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Surely a housewife is a woman in charge of a household, so even a single
>>>>> mother could well be a housewife.
>>>>
>>>> Etymologically, yes, but in today's English everyone assumes that a wife
>>>> must be married.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think that works here. I must ask some people, but I don't break
>>> 'housewife' down literally like that.
>>>
>>> And if I did, she'd be married to the house.
>>>
>>> But, on the other hand, a golf widow wasn't married to a game and also
>>> has a living husband.
>
>> Unless he was hit by lightning on the course when he raise his iron.
>> Then she'd be a real golf widow with no husband.
>
> No, then she'd just be a widow; golf widowhood requires a living husband.

So "grass widow", rather than "fairway widow".


--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

On 4/08/12 8:16 PM, Stan Brown wrote:

> On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 11:15:10 +1000, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>
>> On 04/08/12 01:39, micky wrote:
>>> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>>>
>>> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
>>> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
>>> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
>>> house wife?
>>
>> I've heard "full-time mother".
>

> ((shudders))
>
> As opposed to someone who is only a mother for part of the time?
> Yuck!

Surely that is precisely what most mothers and fathers are these days.
The cost of child care is looming as a possible election issue here for
our feral gummint.


--
Robert Bannister

[Robert Bannister]

Not a very good example because if the way it's cut and the fact that it
has colour. I have seen diamonds and even more zircons that really were
crystal clear.

--
Robert Bannister

[Glenn Knickerbocker]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 17:14:31 +0100, GordonD wrote:
>Easier in the old days when exchanges had names!

All through the 1970s, the Poughkeepsie phone book had a mix of names and
numbers for the same exchanges. Highway Displays still puts "GL2-2121"
on what billboards ClearChannel hasn't bought out yet.

�R Blather, Rinse, Repeat.
http://users.bestweb.net/~notr/telecom.html

[R H Draney]

micky filted:

>
>And I'll tell you what else is bad. Having script house numbers,
>maybe above the garage door. I don't think they're especially
>elegant, and when I'm driving down the street, I can't read them, at
>least not without stopping or crashing. A good house number is
>3112, not thrity-one twelve..

May the fire department be unable to find that address when the place is burning
down....r


--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.

[Guy Barry]

"Robert Bannister" <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:a863o8...@mid.individual.net...

> On 4/08/12 4:40 PM, Guy Barry wrote:

> > I think writing out telephone numbers in words would be a bit extreme!
>
> Then the writer must avoid beginning a sentence with one.

I'm sure I often see things like "0800 numbers are free of charge from
landlines".

> I occasionally
> find myself wanting to start a new sentence with an abbreviation like
> "I.e." before I realise that this would be an offence to the language.

Would it? I've never seen any suggestion that you can't start a sentence
with an abbreviation. I certainly start sentences with "E.g.", especially
on groups like this one. What's your objection to it?

--
Guy Barry

[Evan Kirshenbaum]

micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> writes:

> How do you all feel about "stay-at-home mom"?
>
>
>
>
> The phrase annoys me, because it takes 3 words to make an adjective
> which doesn't even look like an adjective or a substantive but like a
> sentence, and becaues it has hyphens. . Why can't she be called a
> house wife?

Because there's nothing in the notion of being a housewife that
implies that you have kids and it isn't necessarily the case that a
stay-at-home mom is primarily concerned with caring for the house.

--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
Still with HP Labs |If a bus station is where a bus
SF Bay Area (1982-) |stops, and a train station is where
Chicago (1964-1982) |a train stops, what does that say
|about a workstation?
evan.kir...@gmail.com

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

[CDB]

On Aug 4, 1:36 pm, Bill McCray <billmcc...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> On 8/4/2012 12:36 PM, Robin Bignall wrote:

>> CDB<bellemar...@gmail.com> wrote:

[unemployed moms]

>
> >> "Marry in haste, repent at WHAT?"
>
> > At the wedding breakfast.
>
> Okay - that's twice you've sent me out to look up something within
> minutes.  The first was SWMBO.  For this one I found at Wikipedia "A
> wedding breakfast is a dinner given to the bride, bridegroom and guests
> at the wedding reception that follows a wedding in the United Kingdom."
>   Is the name based upon this being the first meal as a married couple?
>   Otherwise, I can't think of why it might be called a breakfast.
>

In olden days, perhaps a mass was celebrated as part of the ceremony;
the couple (maybe the whole wedding party) would go there fasting, in
order to be able to take the sacrament. The breakfast would be the
celebratory breaking of their fast.

Robin's use may refer the married woman's first public appearance
after experiencing her greatest disappointment.

[CDB]

On Aug 4, 1:19 pm, tony cooper <tony.cooper...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 16:18:14 +0000 (UTC), Lewis

>
> <g.kr...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> >In message <qbcq18to1fd3om9rig97upm08rj7of1...@4ax.com>
> >  tony cooper <tony.cooper...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 13:30:41 +0000 (UTC), Lewis

> >> <g.kr...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
> >>>It also implies some sort of laziness. I hate the term.
>
> >> I can't see this at all.
>

> >What'd you do today?
>
> >  Oh nothing, just stayed at home.
>
> >You lazy bum, why didn't you go out and do something?
>
> You can't separate a saying and work with the remaining part.
>
> What's the meaning of "saves nine"?
>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[Arcadian Rises]

> Robert Bannister- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Those are self-employed moms operating from home (I believe there is a
tax term for that kind of workers who can deduct some of the home
expenses). I consider them working moms, together with the free
lancers.

One difference between stay-home moms and working moms is that the
latter do all those "traditional" activities, like washing, ironing,
cooking, etc in their spare time.
Of course, the above is a general rule; there are many exceptions,
such as stay-home moms who have cooks, maids, baby-sitters, and other
help for those "traditional" tasks.

[Ian Jackson]

In message <i61r18ds9620421q4...@4ax.com>,
bubba@bubba.?.com.invalid writes

Ask the Frog who married a Mouse?
--
Ian

[micky]

You can certainly say: Mr. Big is in town. But I don't like it
when I is capitalized and not e.

Why not just say "That is, " which makes clear what is meant and
doesn't let people think you mean "For example".?

[Mike L]

On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:01:06 -0400, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
[...]
>
>Maybe something about "mom" bothers me.
>
In my opinion it should. One of the swarm of bees in my bonnet is the
mass media's near-abandonment of the word "mother". There are several
things wrong with the practice. The least important is that they don't
know what I called my mother, and it's none of their business, and it
wasn't "Mum". The most important is that assuming the right to use
cute diminutives or familiarities belittles the person spoken of:
fifty years back, we had to learn that calling women "girls" was
generally disrespectful, and the same should apply to uncalled-for
"mum" and "mom".

>How about statomemother or staitomother.

Why do we need a special word? If we need to know what Mrs Person
does, it's much more informative to describe the position: "...took a
career break while her children were young", or "has not taken paid
work since her daughter was born", "finds looking after a home and a
family a full-time job", etc.

--
Mike.

[Mike L]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 07:55:19 -0400, Bill McCray
<billm...@mindspring.com> wrote:

>On 8/3/2012 10:16 PM, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 04/08/12 11:25, Cheryl wrote:
>>
>>> Surely a housewife is a woman in charge of a household, so even a single
>>> mother could well be a housewife.
>>
>> Etymologically, yes, but in today's English everyone assumes that a wife
>> must be married.
>

>But then there's midwife.
>
...who may be a man. A few years back, one of us in a.u.e. even
discovered an 18th-C man midwife.

--
Mike.

[Mike L]

On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 20:28:58 +0100, Robin Bignall
<docr...@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 13:19:17 -0400, tony cooper
><tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 16:18:14 +0000 (UTC), Lewis

>><g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <qbcq18to1fd3om9ri...@4ax.com>

>>> tony cooper <tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 13:30:41 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
>>>> <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>It also implies some sort of laziness. I hate the term.
>>>
>>>> I can't see this at all.
>>>
>>>What'd you do today?
>>>
>>> Oh nothing, just stayed at home.
>>>
>>>You lazy bum, why didn't you go out and do something?
>>
>>You can't separate a saying and work with the remaining part.
>>
>>What's the meaning of "saves nine"?
>

>As a punch line it's no great shakes but it has me in stitches.

Darned amusing.

--
Mike.

[Mike L]

On 4 Aug 2012 19:46:30 GMT, "John Varela" <newl...@verizon.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 14:44:36 UTC, tony cooper
><tony.co...@gmail.com> wrote:

[...]
>>
>> Implications based on terms with fixed meaning, or idiomatic
>> expression, are fodder for columnists, language forums, or
>> commentators like the late Andy Rooney, but the meanings are
>> crystal-clear in ordinary use.

>>
>> There's one...crystals are not clear. Some are opaque, but I've never
>> seen a clear crystal.
>
>Here is a picture of one:
>http://mineralsciences.si.edu/hope.htm

Nice rock; shame about the English.

--
Mike.

[R H Draney]

Mike L filted:

>
>Why do we need a special word? If we need to know what Mrs Person
>does, it's much more informative to describe the position: "...took a
>career break while her children were young", or "has not taken paid
>work since her daughter was born", "finds looking after a home and a
>family a full-time job", etc.

That doesn't work in some contexts: "This is Jeopardy! Please welcome today's
contestants. A retired patent attorney from Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, Frank
Henderson...a high-school teacher from Bemidji, Minnesota, Sally Urqhardt...and
our returning champion, who finds looking after a home and a family a full-time
job in Vicksburg, Mississippi, and whose two-day cash winnings total twenty-nine
thousand three hundred eighty-one dollars, Helen Mergenthal"....r

[Arcadian Rises]

On Aug 5, 6:06 pm, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

[...]

>
> Why do we need a special word? If we need to know what Mrs Person
> does, it's much more informative to describe the position: "...took a
> career break while her children were young", or "has not taken paid
> work since her daughter was born", "finds looking after a home and a
> family a full-time job", etc.

Ditto!

Why do we need an all encompassing label? Each particular case may be
different: a stay-home mother who needs some help in the kitchen while
she tends her husband company's accounting; or a mother who stays home
and takes casre of her children and her sister's children without
having a baby sitting license, or without even getting paid for her
baby sitting, but getting some other non-monetary advantages, etc etc.

[micky]

On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:06:54 +0100, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 13:01:06 -0400, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com>
>wrote:
>[...]
>>
>>Maybe something about "mom" bothers me.
>>
>In my opinion it should. One of the swarm of bees in my bonnet is the
>mass media's near-abandonment of the word "mother". There are several
>things wrong with the practice. The least important is that they don't
>know what I called my mother, and it's none of their business,

Yes. It's hard to remember (though I have a letter I wrote them
that might include this) but I think maybe** the funeral home when my
mother died called her "mother". Or maybe it's just advertisements
and movies where I see this. **Or maybe they didn't because I think
I would have said, or maybe I did say, "You mean Mrs. MM, don't you?"

Maybe I said, "Were you and my mother friends?" "No, then I'm sure
she wouldn't want you calling her mother, (or in other circumstances,
calling her by her first name.)

I think the *worst* person to do this is someone making a profit off
off of someone's death.

>and it
>wasn't "Mum".

I dind't call my mother that or "mom".

> The most important is that assuming the right to use
>cute diminutives or familiarities belittles the person spoken of:
>fifty years back, we had to learn that calling women "girls" was
>generally disrespectful, and the same should apply to uncalled-for
>"mum" and "mom".

Today, on Sunday no less, someone raising money for the fire or police
department called and addressed me by my first name. I said "Do you
mean Mr. MM?" and he apologized.

>
>>How about statomemother or staitomother.
>
>Why do we need a special word? If we need to know what Mrs Person
>does, it's much more informative to describe the position: "...took a
>career break while her children were young", or "has not taken paid
>work since her daughter was born", "finds looking after a home and a
>family a full-time job", etc.

I get a commission for every new word I create. Plus royalties.

[Robin Bignall]

That _must_ terminate this thread.
--
Robin Bignall
(BrE)
Herts, England

[CDB]

On Aug 5, 7:51 pm, Robin Bignall <docro...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 23:15:22 +0100, Mike L <n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 20:28:58 +0100, Robin Bignall
> ><docro...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> >>On Sat, 04 Aug 2012 13:19:17 -0400, tony cooper
> >><tony.cooper...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>>On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 16:18:14 +0000 (UTC), Lewis

> >>><g.kr...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
> >>>>In message <qbcq18to1fd3om9rig97upm08rj7of1...@4ax.com>

> >>>>  tony cooper <tony.cooper...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 13:30:41 +0000 (UTC), Lewis
> >>>>> <g.kr...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>It also implies some sort of laziness. I hate the term.
>
> >>>>> I can't see this at all.
>
> >>>>What'd you do today?
>
> >>>>  Oh nothing, just stayed at home.
>
> >>>>You lazy bum, why didn't you go out and do something?
>
> >>>You can't separate a saying and work with the remaining part.
>
> >>>What's the meaning of "saves nine"?
>
> >>As a punch line it's no great shakes but it has me in stitches.
>
> >Darned amusing.
>
> That _must_ terminate this thread.

Sew true.

[John Varela]

"Clear" and "colorless" mean two different things.

--
John Varela

[R H Draney]

John Varela filted:

A watch crystal that's anything but clear is anything but useful....r

[Robert Bannister]

I don't think of "Mr/Mrs/Ms" as abbreviations so much as strangely spelt
words, but I do not like "I.e." - "I.E." is not quite so bad unless it's
your browser, but I prefer to reword and, as you suggest, using the
full, English form is all that is required. I think my main objection is
that they look strange. We recognise i.e., e.g., i.a. and a whole host
of other Latin and even English abbreviations, but most of us have
already internalised them as "words" - words that are always lower case.
I don't think I am wrong is using "word" because I know I am not alone
in using "eye ee" or "ee gee" in speech; I'm less sure about inter alia.

--
Robert Bannister

[Guy Barry]

"Robert Bannister" <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote in message

news:a88vvk...@mid.individual.net...

> I don't think of "Mr/Mrs/Ms" as abbreviations so much as strangely spelt
> words, but I do not like "I.e." - "I.E." is not quite so bad unless it's
> your browser, but I prefer to reword and, as you suggest, using the
> full, English form is all that is required. I think my main objection is
> that they look strange.

"I.e." doesn't look strange to me, although I don't often have occasion to
use it at the start of a sentence.

> We recognise i.e., e.g., i.a. and a whole host
> of other Latin and even English abbreviations,

I don't recognize "i.a.", although you explain it as meaning "inter alia".
I've always seen that written in full (don't really use it myself).

> but most of us have
> already internalised them as "words" - words that are always lower case.
> I don't think I am wrong is using "word" because I know I am not alone
> in using "eye ee" or "ee gee" in speech; I'm less sure about inter alia.

Does anyone ever say "id est" or "exempli gratia"? I very much doubt it; in
fact I'd imagine there are very few people now who know what the
abbreviations originally stood for. Pronouncing them as letters is standard
as far as I know.

--
Guy Barry

[musika]

2B, or not 2B, i.e. the question.
--
Ray
UK

[micky]

On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 10:13:45 +0100, "Guy Barry"
<guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"Robert Bannister" <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
>news:a88vvk...@mid.individual.net...
>
>> I don't think of "Mr/Mrs/Ms" as abbreviations so much as strangely spelt
>> words, but I do not like "I.e." - "I.E." is not quite so bad unless it's
>> your browser, but I prefer to reword and, as you suggest, using the
>> full, English form is all that is required. I think my main objection is
>> that they look strange.
>
>"I.e." doesn't look strange to me, although I don't often have occasion to
>use it at the start of a sentence.
>
>> We recognise i.e., e.g., i.a. and a whole host
>> of other Latin and even English abbreviations,
>
>I don't recognize "i.a.",

Me, neither.

> although you explain it as meaning "inter alia".

Oh.

>I've always seen that written in full (don't really use it myself).

Same here.

>> but most of us have
>> already internalised them as "words" - words that are always lower case.
>> I don't think I am wrong is using "word" because I know I am not alone
>> in using "eye ee" or "ee gee" in speech; I'm less sure about inter alia.
>
>Does anyone ever say "id est" or "exempli gratia"? I very much doubt it; in

I don't think anyone says it. And part of the evidence is that it's
"exemplUM gratia".

And also, about half the time I see i.e used where it makes no sense,
but e.g. would. And vice versa. Another reason I'd rather see the
English

Another thing I don't like -- My gosh, I'm hard to please -- is the
use of i.e. or e.g. in speech. When reading what's written, that's
okay even though abbrievations should be read in full as though they
are not abbreviations. It's okay because the readers don't know what
the initialisms stand for. But when people are not reading
anything but speaking their own words, t I don't like it when they use
and spell out an initialism, including LOL.

I guess I make exceptions for AM and PM.

>fact I'd imagine there are very few people now who know what the
>abbreviations originally stood for. Pronouncing them as letters is standard
>as far as I know.

I should have read further before I commented.

[Guy Barry]

"micky" <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:vcbv181asd3bbnu7o...@4ax.com...

> On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 10:13:45 +0100, "Guy Barry"
> <guy....@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> >Does anyone ever say "id est" or "exempli gratia"? I very much doubt it;
in
>
> I don't think anyone says it. And part of the evidence is that it's
> "exemplUM gratia".

No it's not. "Exempli gratia" means "for the sake of example", so "exempli"
is here in the genitive case ("of example").

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exempli_gratia#exempli_gratia

--
Guy Barry