Tag Archives: objection

Dane

Dane: (n) a native or inhabitant of Denmark.

Some words get swallowed up by just one definition.

For instance:

  • “Appaloosa” always finds you horsing around.
  • “Rockies” brings mountains to mind.
  • And for me, the word “barbecue” will always be linked with ribs.

The “Dane” that always comes to my mind is Hamlet.

Actually, it’s a vision of a very distraught young man, eating cheese Danish.

With my limited understanding of the Shakespearean play, what we have here is a whiny millennial from the sixteenth century, upset because his life is miserable, everybody’s lied to him and he seems to be trapped in a family of the hysterical. (And I don’t mean funny.)

So his answer is to consider suicide.

And he’s very noisy about it.

I guess I would kind of assume that anyone who’s noisy about trying to kill himself is hoping that someone will lodge an objection. Otherwise, you open the door one morning and they’ve already gone to it.

Hamlet whines.

I suppose there’s some level of interest in the style of his complaint—his wording—and you may even think that his character explores the depths of human despair and depravity.

But he doesn’t do much to promote the cause of the Dane—especially since there are people like me, who don’t have any other reference about a whole nation of people, other than their twisted, perhaps unfavored son, Hamlet.

To be or not to be?

That is…

Depressing.

Dalliance

Dalliance: (n) amorous toying; flirtation.

I was there for the death of dalliance.

It was recent, so you may have also been around.

For years and years, I fed my ego, enhanced my library of imagination for masturbation and granted myself a bit of prideful chest-thumping over the glory and beauty of flirtation.

It was very common at one time.

There was only one restriction—you needed to make sure that it was a mutual interaction. In other words, if you were joking around with a woman, as long as she was firing back her “blurt of flirt,” it was absolutely acceptable, invigorating, and released some of the pressure that often occurs in life over the attempt to suppress sexuality.

Granted, if dalliance was occurring from only one person, and the other individual was heading for cover as if there were bullets in the air, then it was certainly harassment and wrong-headed.

But for centuries, men and women have enjoyed teasing one another with false claims, silly innuendos and batting eyes, with stomachs held in and shoulders thrown back.

Then one day it all changed.

We began to believe that even if both parties were participating, it was possible that they were doing so because they feared for their job or they were so frightened by the circumstances that they remained mute, without objection.

I don’t know whether a woman on the job who is flirted with by her boss and returns some of the banter can then claim she was “too scared” to object.

I think we must decide if men and women are equals, or if they’re only equal when we’re talking about job opportunity and pay scale.

Are they equal in their responsibility to speak up for themselves and express their displeasure if they’re being made uncomfortable?

I don’t know how successful we’re going to be if we’re trying to make one person the conscience for two.

In other words, that aforementioned boss should realize the possibility that the employee is too terrified because of the fear of losing her job—so he should not generate any questionable approaches whatsoever.

The human race has survived in a splendid way, riding the wave of dalliance.

I just don’t know who we become if we can’t flirt with each other.

Can we maintain our self-worth if someone isn’t letting us know they think we’re attractive, clever and worth a back-and-forth repartee?

Sexual harassment is a bad thing.

But when does flirtation become sexual harassment?

It is the contention of this author that if an objection is not raised, a door remains open.

Chick

Chick: (n) a young woman.

The battlefield of my human journey is riddled with foxholes where I’ve made stands, only to find myself retreating–often in humiliation.

It makes me wonder if there’s any purpose at all for being obstinate.

Ten or fifteen years ago, I raised an objection over the word “chick.” I was offended on behalf of all women. Matter of fact, I opened up the
 discussion several times in a roomful of people of all generations.

After a lengthy discussion, I found that I was the only person who objected. The much older women remembered when girls were called “chicks” and it was a kind of a hip, Beach Boys thing. The younger girls felt it was a kindly, gentle alternative to “bitch.”

The case I made about the word being chauvinistic or degrading was met with a sympathetic nod but not much approval.

Here’s what I learned from the exercise:

If people aren’t upset about something they experience every day, I will do them no benefit by stirring them up and making them upset.

Donate Button

Beautiful

Beautiful: (adj) pleasing the senses or mind aesthetically.Dictionary B

  • Manipulate the language and you control the discourse.
  • Controlling the discourse dictates the policy.
  • Policy in place, objection is often futile.

I’m not trying to be overly dramatic, yet I tell you that “beautiful” is one of the more cantankerous words in the language.

First of all, it has no real definition.

It is not only “in the eye of the beholder,” it is enforced by the prejudice of the viewing mob. Somehow or another, people have decided through marketing what beautiful is, and we now accept it as the common understanding.

Looking at Facebook the other day, I saw some pictures of my granddaughters. The comments that people selected to place in responding to the pictures were universally shallow.

“Pretty.”

“Gorgeous.”

And of course, “beautiful.”

Moving down the page, I discovered the picture of a young man. The responding words in the comment section were “strong, manly and handsome.”

I am really not trying to be a nudge about this. Being a plain-looking man, I am not offended by those who are attractive, nor do I wish them to have more limited appreciation.

I just feel that the word “beautiful” needs to be used more often to describe a fulfilling experience which radiates joy in the human heart rather than the perfect construction of eye sockets, cheek bones and noses.

I have been around people who are comely. And yes–I was struck with their features. But within five minutes, when it became necessary for them to perform some function other than iridescence, I saw that many of them were so dependent on their countenance to carry them that they had failed to hook up their brain with their tongue.

They were lost.

Yes, in a blind audition, they would be rendered dumb.

So under my granddaughters’ pictures on Facebook, I wrote, “Let’s get off the ‘pretty’ thing and realize that these are intelligent, intuitive and talented people.”

I was scoffed.

After all, these “complimenters” were just trying to be nice.

How could “beautiful” be considered anything but positive?

Even though it succeeds in leaving out most of the rest of us.

Donate Button

Thank you for enjoying Words from Dic(tionary) —  J.R. Practix

 

 

 

All

Words from Dic(tionary)

dictionary with letter A

All: (adj & pron.) referring to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing

As a writer, it’s a word I don’t get to use very often–because putting it to work immediately conjures an image of inclusion without exception.

In other words: “all the people suck.”

You can imagine, there would be some objection to that sentiment.

Even if you trimmed it down to “most people suck,” you might be accused of being overwrought.

“Some of the people suck” is more temperate, but still appears that you think all the people suck and you’re just playing it safe.

So most writers, to protect themselves from the marauding horde of critics, will use the preferable: “a few.”

Yes. A few people suck.

This enables the reader to escape the condemnation of being a sucker, and determine, in his or her own mind, who the rejected few might be.

But there are things I hope really will continue to be believed as applicable to all:

  • How about liberty and justice for all?
  • How about God loving all the world?
  • I like this one: All our possibilities are possible as long as we don’t deem them impossible.
  • All we have to do is love one another.
  • All human beings are equal.

So to me, “all” is a word of aspiration, faith and welcoming. And even though I am careful not to use it when I get in a gruff mood–to rain my verbal fire and brimstone down from my personal heavenly perch–I do greatly enjoy including all my brothers and sisters … when I know blessing is waiting around the bend.