text:
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Women Girls
Certainly the term girl is also used by some older women, some of whom are related to me, who tend to refer to groups of other older women as girls, but my topic today is the relative use of girls vs. women to refer to young(ish) female persons.
It took me awhile to get used to the term girls when applied to young female adults, and I still tend to use the term women, but I suppose that just shows my age. As long as girls is used in parallel with boys/guys, rather than with "men", however, I no longer think it is offensive to refer to young women as girls, especially if it is used by other young people to refer to themselves and their peers.
I admit that with some reluctance, so I guess I can't say that I am really used to it, even now, because I still find it a bit startling to hear someone in their 20's-30's, or even older, referred to as a girl. The sheer number of adults who don't consider it demeaning to be referred to as a girl, however, suggests that the term has no particular negative connotation about capability or maturity.
At the same time, I think it is too bad if woman is viewed as a technical, formal, stodgy, and perhaps even offensive term. Female children are girls, and at some point when these children become adults, they are women, just as boys become men. When I was 5 years old or 9 years old, I was a girl. I couldn't imagine wanting to use the same term for myself when I was 30.
Nevertheless, girl is a pervasive term these days. For those of us who feel disappointed by this trend, perhaps we can come to an understanding with those who do not share our disappointment: those who prefer the term women can try to realize that girl is not necessarily an offensive way to refer to an adult female (except in the circumstance in which males are men and females of the same age are girls), and those who prefer the term girl can try to realize that woman is not an offensive or inappropriate way to refer to an adult female.
60 comments:
- Dr. Confused said...
There is an emeritus professor in our department who occasionally still haunts the hallways. Every time he exclaims "Good girl!" at me it is a shock, and it has happened dozens of times.
"How are you settling in here?"
"Pretty well. I'm writing a grant proposal on X"
"Good girl!"
Once he used my phone to call his wife. "What are you doing? Oh, the ironing! Good girl!" I assume she is in her 70s like him. - 3/25/2010 12:44:00 AM
- Jo said...
As an under 30 woman, I prefer "gal" myself.
I refer to this as the "guy" problem. At least in my dialect (Western Canadian university student), "men" and "women" seem formal (and usually are only used for adults who have got past the binge drinking stage). "Boys" and "girls" refer to children. So there is a gap, from late teenagehood through the college years, which aren't really accounted for.
Most people I know use "guy" age-neutrally (and even gender-neutrally in the plural) and can fill the gap with this, but there isn't any equivalent for a single female. ("Gal," at least to me, seems almost comically informal.) Hence the problem of deciding between "woman" and "girl."
To tell the truth I am often have a hard time with this choice unless there is a parallel with "man" or "boy." I'm young enough that I still feel kind of weird talking about a "man" or "woman" who is younger than me, but in a couple years I think my choices will largely be based on judgements about the subject's maturity. - 3/25/2010 01:09:00 AM
- barbara said...
As an FSP who was adressed as "girl" into her early forties by elder male colleagues (who wouldn't dream of using boy for male professors of any age) I used to find it deeply offensive, usually on a par with a top aministrator's habit to address me as Mrs (and my male colleagues as Professor).
As a woman in her forties, I sometimes use it with my female friends and so do they. None (I hope!) is offended, and we view it as a running joke to remind ourselves that despite white hair, adolescent children, and so on, we're still young at heart. - 3/25/2010 01:23:00 AM
- Klaas said...
To me "woman" in English and in Dutch is just one little step away from derogatory. As in "that woman!". Doesn't work the same way for "that man". That is why "guys" referring to men and girls :) is a good option.
I don't know if you have heard of a British panel show hosted by Stephen Fry, called QI. Apparrently their 'elves' found that girl used to denote children of both sexes and boy used to refer to servants.
Just an anecdote to confuse things further. XD - 3/25/2010 06:13:00 AM
Very interesting topic! I have noticed this divide as well. It seems that authority figures (e.g. profs) in their ~40's prefer to use "women/men" for anyone college age or older, while I have always felt somewhat uncomfortable being called a "woman," even in my mid-20's.
Somehow "women" seems inappropriate, stodgy, or overly P.C. to me, particularly when it is used to describe college freshmen who often aren't even the age of majority. It's definitely an irrational feeling I have, though, and I think reflects changing usage/norms. Females (and males) in their 20's are increasingly putting off traditionally adult activities such as marriage, kids, etc. It's likely part of the same social trends (good or bad) that we prefer to put off adult labels like "woman" as well. - 3/25/2010 07:18:00 AM
It's offensive in the same way that calling adult (black) males "boy" is. It's considered pejorative and doesn't belong in the professional setting.
You may hear your colleagues refer to FSPs as women but the secretaries as girls. That is out-and-out wrong. - 3/25/2010 07:18:00 AM
Believe it or not, I have given this some serious thought. This is not the only example of language trivializing women. You could give literally hundreds of examples, lots of data and of course, anecdotes.
As far as I can see, there is only one solution. The solution is to replace the English language (aka Oldspeak) with Newspeak. This Newspeak would be created by cutting the English language to the bone, destoying thousands of extraneous words.
For instance, the trivialization of women by referring to them as "girls" could easily be removed if we could get rid of all the words like "man", "woman", "boy", "girl", "guy", etc. We could refer to a female between 20-29 as a "f2", a male between 10-19 as a "m1" and so on... you get the idea of the naming scheme. A person whose age is difficult to determine would simply be referred to as "m" or "f". An added advantage would be that the letters "m" and "f" are of the exact same length and hence we would lose the implication that the word "female" has been obtained by modifying the word "male", thus implying the inferior status of women.
The point is to make Newspeak such that sexist ideas are impossible to express at all in a coherent manner. Although in Newspeak it might be possible to crudely convey sexist ideas, like we could say a sexist Newspeak sentence:
but everyone would realize that its an obvious absurdity. The feminist revolution will be complete when the language is perfect. - 3/25/2010 07:29:00 AM
I think that "girl" became a casual/friendly term for woman around the same time that "guys" started to be used for men.
Part of the issue may be that males seem to have one more option (boys, guys, men) whereas for females, girls seems to be tha standard equivalent of boys or guys. I'm in my late 20s and tend to you "girls" to caually decribe women of my own age bracket, "women" just often sounds a bit to formal. - 3/25/2010 07:30:00 AM
I'm 32 and can appreciate the term "girl"; although I often use it when talking about us "girls" goofing around/having fun, as a more informal term. "Woman" gets used when I'm being a bit more formal, e.g.: "She's an incredibly smart woman and scientist." I don't think I'd ever view the usage of either term offensive.
Another note on the male-female issue. I freely refer to the "boys" in our department (even the senior professors) when they act like boys, and men when they act like men. So, at least in my mind, there's not really a male-female divide on this one. - 3/25/2010 07:58:00 AM
- Alyssa said...
I had this exact problem when writing a recent blog post. The situation involved two other women, but I initially put "girls" because they are in their early 20s, and I thought "woman" just sounded odd (I still don't see myself as a "woman", and I'm 31!). But, calling them "girls" felt like I was looking down on them, and using "females" just sounded ridiculous. We need a new word!
I find this fascinating, particularly since English is not my mother tongue (I live in the US). When I teach a Freshman seminar, I would not dream of calling the female students girls, no way. I am happy calling them women, or young women. In French, "girls" would not be used in a professional environment, except in a very informal way, often by women of any age (Allez les filles..). The terms are "femme" or "jeune femme", with "jeune" having become older with time. Therefore, my reflex is to use women and young women, although I see some people frawning at the term "young" because mention of age, even in a relative way, is not PC. At the other end of the spectrum, one does not use old woman in French. The phrase is softened either by talking about a woman "d'un certain age", or "d'une vieille dame". Terms I don't like to use are male and female, too technical, even biological. I suspect what controls my usage of the words girls, women, etc. is still very much influenced by my first language and culture, and what I read in the comments shows that, even for native English speakers, there is as much variation of usage and understanding of meaning of these terms.
On my running teams in high school and college we always called each other "ladies" in plural when we were cheering, etc. We were proud of the fact that we were no longer "girls." I still use that term (I'm 30), though I'm not sure that others do or what they think of me when I say it, but I think it works much better than "girls" at least for more than one. If you're just talking about one "lady" anyway - why not just use her name? Or say "person"?
I'm with you, FSP. It's high time we stodgy old biddies get over our irrational objections to 40 yo girls. I'm going to start referring to every female person as a girl, I really am, just as soon as we start getting paid the same as our equally qualified male peers, get access to the same resources for our research as our equally funded male peers, get our contributions to science acknowledged and respected, when we stop being mistaken for the secretaries of our male colleague whose offices are next door, etc. etc. etc.
In other words, no time soon. - 3/25/2010 08:55:00 AM
- STP said...
I was infuriated while watching the winter olympics and the announcers would refer to the female athletes as girls and the male athletes as men. Since I mostly only watched women's hockey (being a player myself), and many of those women are in their 20s and 30s (some with children!), the term girl was very shocking. I think girl is incredibly demeaning and in this context reinforces the idea that female athletes are inferior to male athletes. The same is true in any professional setting.
FSP, thank you. Commenters, thank you. You have no idea how timely this post and ensuing discussion are.
I am a postdoc. I just received an email from a male graduate student in my lab. The message was sent to both myself and a new female graduate student in the lab. The email reads something like this:
A is what I did for you last night. It would be nice if you could do B, and if you are feeling ambitious it might be nice to see C.
Signed male grad student"
The only paraphrasing that I did was to replace details with A/B/C, the rest of the language is verbatim.
- butterflywings said...
I do find 'girl' insulting.
The 'good' woman society wants us to be *is* a girl - pretty, compliant, speaks when spoken to or when required to entertain. Likeable, yes. To be taken seriously? No way.
So no wonder the label 'woman' seems slightly stodgy, PC, even pejorative...because society does not want us to be women.
No-one would refer to adult me as boys. I don't find 'guys' the same.
And anyone calling me 'good girl' would rather soon come to regret it.
'Females (and males) in their 20's are increasingly putting off traditionally adult activities such as marriage, kids, etc.'
Erm - you can be an adult without being married or having kids. - 3/25/2010 09:43:00 AM
I agree with everyone's comments. I think there should be a feminine equivalent to guys. To me boy/girl refers to persons 17 and younger. Men/women refers to person 40 and older. Guys refers to males between 18-39. There is defiantly a hole in the english language. Gals just seems weird to me ...
I have a hard time immediately identifying as a woman even though I am 30. I will say when I refer to myself as a woman, it does make me feel empowered somehow. I have recently tried to stop myself from using "guys" when referring to a group of women, although I still use it when it's a mixed-gender group.
I remember being in high school and a male teacher greeting my two female friends and I with, "Hi ladies." That is the first distinct memory I have in which I realized I was supposed to be growing up, for whatever that means, but I think it also showed respect from his side, which is great. - 3/25/2010 10:02:00 AM
- Buttered Toast Master said...
One of my coworkers in Grad school constantly referred to himself and his peers as "kids." Therefore, I agree with Anonymous 7:17 about people "putting off traditionally adult activities such as marriage". It's probably just language following our culture's extended childhood expectations.
I don't have any such expectations of mature people, and accordingly try to refer to anyone with a high school diploma as a man or woman, period. - 3/25/2010 10:09:00 AM
I brought this up in the comments of the last post, so let me reiterate.
Some of this may be my age -- having been a college student in the 80's and requesting to be called "woman" rather than "girl" even at age 19. I do see some of your points.
But, I disagree that just because some young women (even if it's the majority) are comfortable calling themselves girls, the term is therefore okay. There are other social conventions that people have become used to over time that portray one group in a more negative light, and that doesn't mean it's okay.
It may seem like it's simply language, but language does have power. It affects how we perceive people. So if faculty refer to young women as girls, and young men as men, or even guys, it is setting up differences in perceptions or expectations that can potentially be harmful over time. - 3/25/2010 10:23:00 AM
- Wanna Be Mother said...
I will probably always refer to my female friends as my "girls" and say things like "girls night out". Hopefully I will still be saying those things until the day I die. But an adult male calling me a girl would annoy me.
i think ross described everything i would have said perfectly!
(i'm a 21-year-old female grad student)
basically, i feel weird calling anyone who's in their twenties OR who i consider part of my "peer group" (e.g. a 30-year-old friend and fellow grad student, or 31-year-old officemate) "man" or "woman." the real problem for me then is that while "guy" is a good thing to call male people in this group, there isn't really an equivalent alternative for female people. - 3/25/2010 10:43:00 AM
I just got scolded for referring to a grad student as a girl. Being a 30+ female myself, I guess I think of anyone younger than myself as a girl ( this is going to become ridiculous as I get older, but we'll see what happens). I don't know what I think about myself, but not 'woman'.... I agree that we need the female equivalent of a guy. I would like 'lady' to be that word. It's perfect. I vouch to try and use it.
I certainly go to a women's college, not a girls' school (but my sister's all-female high school is still a girls' school). We make a conscious effort to refer to other female scientists as women. Even when you're not in science, calling us a "girls' school" is very insulting.
I'm in my 20's and still refer to myself and my female peers as "girls." "Women" sounds much too mature for us. I don't think of stuffy or anything when I think of a "woman" but I do think of someone who is more mature than myself. I wear t-shirts and jeans to work still, I paint my fingernails green for St. Patrick's Day and I wear my hair in pigtails from time to time. These don't sound like womanly things to me. I think 30 is about the age I would start to consider myself a woman rather than a girl; then again, when I was 10 I thought I'd consider myself a woman at 20. Knowing some of my friends who are nearing 30, I'm inclined to say we still don't feel quite adult enough for these grown up words.
I use guys and boys to describe my male friends. It would be super awkward for me to refer to them as "men." I do use female and male sometimes rather than girl and guy. Gal seems perhaps more appropriate than girl (gal is to girl as guy is to boy in my book).
In a nutshell (having read Ross's comment before clicking "Publish) I agree almost completely with Ross. - 3/25/2010 11:28:00 AM
- Gerty-Z said...
As a female scientist, I actively avoid using the term "girls" to talk to young women. Not only do I find it slightly demeaning, but especially when talking to undergrads and graduate students I want to convey the sense that we are all grown ups in a professional atmosphere. I will hang out with "my girls" and sometimes will use the term "ladies" (and "gentlemen"-not "guys") but I generally refer to young men and women when teaching, etc. I know this makes me sound a little old-school for someone in their early 30s, but I think it makes for a respectful tone.
- inBetween said...
A friend of mine refers to her one year old boy as "little man" and her 6 year old daughter a "little girl". Drives me bananas.
An old issue, indeed. But I have to protest against the word "lady." This should only be used if we're also talking about gentlemen. I think some of the discomfort with the word "woman" (which I quickly got over when I started college, and I wish everyone else would too) comes from this old distinction that a proper, well-behaved adult female is a lady; to call someone a woman implies something less that that -- lower class, not quite of the same moral standing, something along those lines. (There's a scene in an E.M. Forster novel where the English butler reports on who's at the door: "There's a... woman here to see you." Speaks volumes.) I thought this distinction had mostly disappeared, but reading some of these comments I see it hasn't.
As for girl, I do use it occasionally to refer to young women in a casual setting, but there's nothing wrong with the word woman. - 3/25/2010 11:46:00 AM
On language issues, I follow a two-step rule. First, I try to use a word that will not offend anyone, regardless of what I think of that word. For example, I don't use the word "retarded" anymore, because I know some people are offended by it. Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with the word in itself -- it just means "slowed" or "stalled", and that's a decent description of what can happen to the cognitive capacities of someone with a developmental disability. But if people with developmental disabilities don't want to be referred to as having mental retardation because of the connotations the word has picked up, I respect that. Now I always thought that nobody would be offended by "woman", whereas some who are over 18 would be offended by "girl", so I've always used "woman" to refer to anyone who appears to be older than a child. Now, though, it sounds like some people are offended by "woman" because it's old and stodgy, so I have to follow rule #2: when any word I choose is likely to offend somebody, then I make a judgment about which offense is the most justified. In this case, "girl" literally means female child, and "woman" means female adult. So I think it's completely justified for a woman to feel offended at being called a girl. But even if "woman" has connotations of being older than 30, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being considered to be older than 30. If we weren't living in such an ageist society, people would feel honored to be referred to as mature adults. So I don't care if women under the age of 30 are offended when I call them women. Therefore, I will continue to do so.
- Rosie Redfield said...
A few days ago the always-interesting linguistics blog Language Log (http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2200) had a nice discussion about refering to groups of women (or containing women) as 'guys'.
I agree with the various people who say that the issue is that "girl" is the closest thing to a female equivalent of "guy". It's an informal term. Unfortunately, "girl" also means a female child. I almost think of them as different words that happen to be spelled and pronounced the same.
I'm 24, a female in computer science, a politically active feminist. I'm not offended by "girls" if it's being used as an obvious parallel to "guys" (or "boys") by a peer.
If I'm being called a girl to patronize or demean me, that's another story. Like my officemate's client at work, two years ago, who asked him, in front of me and clearly intending me to hear, "[Officemate], how were you so lucky to get to share an office with such a pretty girl?" I think "girl" should pretty much never be used in a professional setting.
It's all about the context. - 3/25/2010 12:30:00 PM
- Ann said...
Interesting how many young women say they are uncomfortable with being called women, or using the term woman for a peer. Does this have something to do with young people being unwilling to be considered "grownups"?
When I was in college (a million years ago), I would have been insulted to be called a "girl". - 3/25/2010 12:54:00 PM
I think most women my age (mid-20s) would use "girls" in casual conversation (i.e., "girls' night out") as an equivalent to "guys" (and I would also use "guys" to refer to a group of peers, whether mixed-sex or all-female, as in "What do you guys want to do tonight?"). My grandmother uses "gal" in contexts I would use "girl," but I feel like that sounds quite old-fashioned.
However, I use "women" in more formal contexts--for example, "Why aren't there more women in this department?" I have also been consciously trying to refer to individual adult females as women for the past year or so.
I've also noticed myself referring to my undergrad students as "young people," which makes me feel quite old (this is what my mom uses for young adults and people in their 20s!).
I doubt that this has much to do with the putting off of traditionally adult responsibilities, as my grandmother's generation had terms that correlate to ours as well. - 3/25/2010 02:12:00 PM
P.S. I should also say that if someone ADDRESSED me as "girl," that would be quite offensive. At least in my experience, however, the sexist in universities have managed to learn how to correct the most egregious language errors, without correcting the underlying problem. I worked in finance for a few years after undergrad, however, and especially among the reps (95% of which were male at my firm), I was constantly receiving comments that reduced me to my attractiveness and age.
- Ms.PhD said...
I don't care that much about girls vs. women. I actually hate the word gal. It's outdated and I tend to associate it with things like "Gal Friday". Very Mad Men, if you will.
Lately I'm disgusted by my friends with boy babies who insist on using the phrase "little guy". As in "the little guy did this" and "the little guy did that". Get over it, he's a BABY. He's not growing up any faster no matter what you call him. - 3/25/2010 02:21:00 PM
- Fia said...
I find it surprising that nobody here notices why this may be, - women in their twens and thirties being called girls, and some of those even liking it.
It's because in our societies today, women are not allowed to grow up, - we've got to stay size 0, childlike with tiny waists, sweet faces, childlike, to be liked by men.
It is demeaning, and it is reflected in how many of us choose to clothe themselfes. I rather be calles a women my age than being told I look 10 years younger than I am. I think this issue is about allowing women to grow old(er) gracefully and not expecting them to look like 16 until they ar 50 years old.
I hate it when someone calls me "girl". It's nothing like guy. It's like boy, and everybody who calls me "girl" gets called "boy" in response. - 3/25/2010 02:21:00 PM
My grandparents use "gal" with aplomb. I think it would be perfect if it didn't sound so strange coming out of the mouth of anyone under 80.
How about the oh-so-slang, but gender neutral "peeps". As in
"Hey peeps, waz up!!"
Okay, seriously, I am trying to break my habit of starting out collaborative emails with "Hey guys," (I am a girl/female/woman)... what do I use instead?
Hi people,
Hi all, (current favorite)
Hi everyone,
(no greeting) - 3/25/2010 06:29:00 PM
it's tricky cuz the double standrd already exists.
girl ~ young attractive female
woman ~ stiff authority figure
nobody likes to be a stiff authority figure, so when you call a 28 yr old female a "woman" it's not as charming.
or something like that. - 3/25/2010 11:54:00 PM
What's fascinating about this to me is that I didn't have the chance to read your post yesterday, and yet I was thinking of exactly this same issue as I was walking across town.
I pretty much concluded that only "women" will do in this situation (for me, anyway; I'm a "guy," so your milage may vary).
"Girls," can be perfectly well-used in an informal situation for things like "girls night out," or "hanging out with the girls," etc., but if I were a woman and one of my colleagues called me a girl in a professional context, I'd be inclined to commit an act of violence.
The fact that some people are willing to accept it without taking offense doesn't mean that it isn't rude.
And while some people here have suggested "ladies" as an alternative, I've always found that a problematic word.
It could be just me (or maybe my age cohort: early 30's), but I feel as though it can be used in two ways: 1) Formally -the parallel to "gentlemen," not "guys;" and thus more formal and stodgy than "women", or 2) Informally, in a way that has always sounded a tad belittling to me (except when used by people of a certain age).
I don't claim my feelings on this are necessarily correct, but "ladies" used informally by people not pushing retirement age has always made me cringe.
"Guys" used in a unisex way, and "gals," for those who can pull it off with aplomb both seem fine for relatively informal situations to me, but if I ever have the need to discuss a group of female human adults in a professional setting, I think I'll stick with "women." - 3/26/2010 06:13:00 AM
I am a '30' woman who sometimes has 'girls night' with my girlfriends. However, in a professional sense, I always prefer woman and I strive to refer to the other women I interact with (college -aged and up) as such and not as 'girls'.
One thing that bugged me during the Olympics was that during the downhill skiing the announcers referred to the women skiers as 'girls'. Some of the 'girls' were nearly my age! The description seemed inappropriate and disrespectful. Unfortunately, I didn't get to hear the announcers for the male skiers, but I am betting they were not 'boys'! - 3/26/2010 07:05:00 AM
When I went off to a women's college 20 years ago, we were told to eradicate the term "girl" from our vocabularies, except to refer to those under 18. It felt painfully unnatural at first to refer to each other as "women." But within just a few weeks, it came to seem perfectly normal to the point that it was grating when an outsider would use the term "girls."
That said, I am not offended by the use of the term "girls" to refer to very young women, because I understand there aren't a lot of alternatives. I was annoyed when someone referred in a work context referred to a 45-year old professional as "that girl." - 3/26/2010 11:22:00 AM
I have noticed another irritating phenomenon. I often have the sense that some men will bend over backwards to use almost any word but the word "woman." They stumble around awkwardly until they finally spit out "lady" or "female." It is almost as if they think the word "woman" is an insult. My father-in-law admitted that he actually was worried that "woman" is an insulting word.
On the one hand, part of me says I ought to sympathize with men who are confronting linguistic territory that seems to them fraught with peril. On the other hand, my immediate reaction is irritation. It seems to me that they think being a "woman" is an unfortunate or embarrassing condition for which they need to find a euphamism, and that assumption is insulting in itself. - 3/26/2010 11:27:00 AM
As a youngish female person I find the term girl offensive. I tend to respond by referring to anyone who uses the term as a boy or an infant. Being called "a female" is irritating as well because it brings to mind breeding stock of various livestock species.
I see no problem with using the word "woman" to refer to adult females. To me it gives the connotation of maturity and responsibility and makes the very real tangible distinction that you are an adult not a child. If being an adult, being mature and responsible equates to being "old and stodgy" then that's more a sign of insecurity in the mind of the subject, than reality. I'm a woman in my early-30s.
Every year the RAs in my all-female dorms have started most of their emails by greeting us as ladies. They then use that pronoun throughout their messages. (I searched my inbox, and the only other instance of ladies starting an email is when a TA called our discussion section "ladies and gentlemen.")
Whenever I read it, it feels like we're playing dress-up in the term. - 3/26/2010 11:18:00 PM
"It seems to me that they think being a "woman" is an unfortunate or embarrassing condition for which they need to find a euphamism, and that assumption is insulting in itself."
Aha! I've always wondered why it bothers me that some people seem unable to use the word "woman", and why I often feel annoyed by their reliance on "lady" or "female" instead. I think you've put your finger on it! - 3/27/2010 10:00:00 PM
- Madscientistgirl said...
I think one of the anonymous comments gets it exactly right: "At least in my experience, however, the sexist [sic] in universities have managed to learn how to correct the most egregious language errors, without correcting the underlying problem." I would rather be called a girl by someone who will listen to me and treat me (otherwise) with respect than be called a woman by someone who otherwise doesn't treat me with respect. But I have seldom met a native English speaker who refered to women as "girls" in a professional setting who was not sexist in other ways too.
There are many more harmful expressions of sexism than calling women "girls," but this is something easy to prove because it's objective. If I consistently get unfairly harsh evaluations or get fewer invited talks or get less grant money than my male peers, it's harder to prove if it's sexism, even if my qualifications and accomplishments are similar. If I'm trying to prove that a male colleague is sexist, it's easier to document that he calls women girls than, say, that he has a long history of "personality conflicts" with women and no history of conflicts with men.
But then, I also think that some of the problem is that people insist that we have enough proof to win a lawsuit before they'll even attempt to address the problem. If I come to my supervisor and say Dr. Jones insults me constantly and he tries to make me do all of the menial work and he treats all of the men in the lab differently, why can't my supervisor sit Dr. Jones down and discuss the problematic behavior with him? Why does the behavior have to get bad enough that I could win a lawsuit? When I went to the spokesperson of one of my former collaborations with Sherry Towers' paper on gender discrimination in the allocation of invited talks in D0 and said, hey, look, their invited talk allocation procedure is exactly the same as ours, shouldn't we evaluate our procedure and make sure it's fair, was the only response really to say that one should not even consider this unless and until I had proven objectively that our procedure was unfair and that the women weren't really just not good enough? I admit, I seize on things like calling women "girls" when I'm having problems with a male colleague, but I only do this because other complaints aren't taken seriously. - 3/28/2010 06:42:00 PM
- web design Los Angeles said...
Well it really depends on the kind of women or girls you're talking to. As for me I find it very offensive to call me girl well I'm not a teenager anymore and in-between.
- Police jobs said...
To me calling me as girl means lack of worldly experienced, Immature. Hmmm! But I think it really depends on how the word was used or delivered that makes it offensive or not.
I (a youngish woman) use "ladies" informally with all-female groups of friends as an approximate equivalent to "guys"... but I would be offended if I were addressed this way in professional context by colleagues (exception: colleagues who are also good firends, female, close to my age).
- mOOm said...
"Woman" was considered derogatory when "Lady" was the accepted term to refer to a female person in some English dialects/classes. I was often corrected for that slip when I was very young (1960s/70s) That's why some people still have a problem with it I think. I'm surprised to hear that there is a swing back to "girl" from "woman".
I disagree with Franglais. I work in a French lab, and I (nearly 30) am regularly called a 'girl' whereas younger men are always referred to as 'men', sometimes in the same sentence.
What also drives mes mad is that on the CNRS application form (for permanent jobs), there are three boxes: Monsieur, Madame, Mademoiselle. The missing box is of course 'Doctor', showing that they don't care if you already have your Ph.D. or not, but find your marital status relevant. - 4/12/2010 03:24:00 AM
- Dr. Psycho said...
I remember reading an article in a magazine aimed at teenaged girls (that must have been awhile ago, back when I had some of those in my home) in which the author confessed to "'guy' envy": she wished there were a word less formal than "woman" but less minutal than "girl". She nominated "guy" as the substitute (just as women had co-opted jeans, sneakers, &c.).
I would prefer the revival of "gal" myself, but hey.... - 4/18/2010 01:53:00 PM
- Mordecai said...
As for the (not especially analogous) man/guy/boy situation, as an early 20s guy I'm kind of averse to the word "men" and especially the singular "man;" I think it's less that I don't want to be thought of as an adult, as that I don't want to accept my grandfather's gender roles.
"Man" strikes me as kind of a purple word, in a Churchillian kind of way. ("The power of man has grown in every sphere..." "...but we must never cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the rights of man..." and so on.) There's a glory to it. Sometimes that's good, but I don't want to be smacked with it every time I specify my gender, and I especially don't want our only good word for that to be itself so gendered.
I feel really awkward calling myself a man; like I'm puffing myself up involuntarily and might have to fight someone, or at least grow a huge beard and stride around campus ramrod-straight glaring at people all day. That's largely why I prefer "guy;" there's none of that in there. It connotes a sort of easinessgoing that I actually possess.
"Boy" is also a good word, but lends itself to different purposes.
I think we can agree that the gynonym problem should be settled to the satisfaction of the gynaikes in question (the satisfaction ton gynaikon?) and not to mine, but I will say this: for me as a guy to call someone a woman strikes me as kind of distancing, in a "how do you do madam" sort of way. Not language that connotes a genuine rapport. Gal however doesn't have this problem -- sure, it's kind of old-world-celtic, but so was "guy" until recently, and apart from that "gal" has all the right connotations.
I will say, though, that I'm horribly averse to the word "lady;" my grandmother, for example, considered its antonym to be w****. When I hear "lady" I hear it as "you appear virtuous enough, for now" and it chills my blood a bit. I'd sleep easier if we could bury that word for good, along with a number of others. - 6/15/2010 07:29:00 PM
- Mordecai said...
By the way, as a compromise that satisfies no one, I frequently refer to groups of people (of either or mixed gender) as "folks;" in the salutations of emails for example. This strikes me as mostly guy-ish, but perhaps insufficiently equalizing. How do we disciples of FSP feel about it?
When I can call my boss a boy I might consider allowing myself to be called a girl. But I doubt it.
What is wrong with referring to people as people, a person as a person, a child as a child, etc. The person-hood of everyone seems to be the missing link in all situations where people are speaking or acting inconsiderately toward others.
Perhaps in some situations we could even say "humans", since there are definitely "people" among other species also? We already have enough humans on this planet, talking about each other with words that emphasize sex all the time might be part of the problem. If we emphasize what we have in common it might be easier to treat each other well automatically! - 11/17/2010 10:59:00 AM


text:
Strut - Mazda (B37F-34-700B)
2007-2009 Mazda 3 | OEM Parts & Accessories
- Brand:
- Positions: Right
- Other Names: Damper(R) Front
- Description:
Mazdaspeed3. Right. With turbo.
- Replaces: B37F-34-700, B37F-34-700A
- Sold In Quantity: 1
Also Purchased
Vehicle Fitment
Year | Make | Model | Body & Trim | Engine & Transmission |
2009 | Mazda | 3 | Mazdaspeed, S, i | 2.0L L4 - Gas, 2.3L L4 - Gas |
2008 | Mazda | 3 | Mazdaspeed, S, i | 2.0L L4 - Gas, 2.3L L4 - Gas |
2007 | Mazda | 3 | Mazdaspeed, S, i | 2.0L L4 - Gas, 2.3L L4 - Gas |
Mazda Swag specializes in offering Genuine Mazda OEM Parts, in fact we are an actual Mazda Dealership, Scherer Mazda. We are located in Peoria, IL and pride ourselves in delivering competitive pricing, genuine Mazda OEM parts, quick turnaround and excellent service. Can't find what you are looking for? Don't worry, just contact us and we will do our absolute best to accommodate you and get your Mazda back on the road.
Our Mazda Parts team has a combined 100 years of experience in the Mazda OEM Parts industry. Do we have the Mazda Parts knowledge that you are looking for and expect? I think the answer to that question is easy, YES! To learn more or talk to one of our Mazda Parts experts contact us today.
Home Reviews Our Location Videos
MazdaSwag is your #1 online mazda parts store. You can purchase genuine mazda parts, and genuine mazda accessories. Our oem mazda parts are shipped directly from a mazda wholesale supplier. This allows our customers to purchase original mazda parts for discounted pricing. MazdaSwag offers genuine mazda oem parts, mazda performance parts, mazda accessories, and mazda apparel. We are committed to providing the widest selection of quality mazda parts, and quality mazda accessories, all at discounted pricing. At Mazda Swag, we stock thousands of Mazda Parts right at your fingertips. You can now search for your own Mazda car parts, order them, and have it delivered directly to your door at half the cost other competitors charge. If your search for your Mazda auto parts comes up short, just call one of our sales professionals to help assist you in finding the Mazda car parts you need.
If you want a reliable and safe car that performs well, it's important that you get the Genuine Mazda Parts that you are looking for. Shopping elsewhere to save money can cost you more in the long run, as minor problems left unfixed can lead to major repairs. At Mazda Swag the parts that we sell are factory certified. Why go anywhere else?

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Hearing Resources
What is an Audiologist?
Audiologists are healthcare professionals who evaluate, diagnose, treat, and manage hearing loss and hearing conditions like tinnitus and balance disorders. An audiologist holds a minimum of a Master's degree in Audiology. Professionals seeking education in Audiology who do not currently hold a Master's degree must now pursue a Doctoral degree in Audiology (Au.D). Audiologists must be licensed in the state where they practice, and are regulated by the Division of Consumer Affairs.
An audiologist may be awarded the Certificate of Clinical Competence in Audiology by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA), otherwise known as the CCC-A. With additional training and expertise, the audiologist may receive the honor of Fellow, which is bestowed by the American Academy of Audiology (AAA).
What Types of Tests and Treatments do Audiologists Perform?
Common services and treatments provided by an audiologist include:
● Diagnostic hearing tests and evaluations● Audiologic evaluations● Hearing aid fitting and consultation● Hearing aid repairs and maintenance● Pediatric hearing loss detection and treatment● Hearing conservation and protection programs● Earmold and earplug fitting and consultation● Musicians earplugs and monitors● Tinnitus treatment programs● Dizziness and balance testing and treatment● Ear or hearing-related surgical monitoring in hospital settings● Hearing rehabilitation and auditory training● Assisting in cochlear implant programs● Insurance billing for medically necessary diagnostic testing and hearing aids, when patients have policies that cover these benefits
How Do I Know if I Have Hearing Loss?
If you think you or a loved one may have hearing loss, you are not alone. Oftentimes people notice signs of hearing loss but do not take the steps to get it treated right away. Typically, it takes people an average of seven years to seek treatment. You may have hearing loss if:
● You hear people speaking but you have to strain to understand their words.● You frequently ask people to repeat what they said.● You don't laugh at jokes because you miss too much of the story or the punch line.● You frequently complain that people mumble.● You need to ask others about the details of a meeting you just attended.● You play the TV or radio louder than your friends, spouse and relatives.● You cannot hear the doorbell or the telephone.● You find that looking at people when they speak to you makes it easier to understand.You miss environmental sounds such as birds or leaves blowing.● You find yourself avoiding certain restaurants because they are too noisy, or certain people, because you cannot understand them.● You hear a ringing sound in your ears, especially when it is quiet.
What Causes Hearing Loss?
Hearing loss can be due to several factors such as the aging process, exposure to loud noise, medications, infections, head or ear trauma, congenital (birth) or genetic factors, diseases, as well as a number of other causes. Recent data shows that about 20 percent of adults in the United States (48 million) report some degree of hearing loss. Hearing loss often occurs gradually throughout a lifetime.
How is Hearing Loss Diagnosed?
If you have any symptoms of hearing loss, you should see an audiologist to have a formal hearing evaluation. This hearing test, or audiologic evaluation, is diagnostic in nature and allows the audiologist to determine the type, nature and degree of your hearing loss. Your sensitivity, acuity and accuracy to speech understanding will be assessed as well. Your audiologist may also test for speech understanding at different volume levels and in different conditions, such as noise, to provide an indication as to how successful of a candidate you will be for hearing aids.
The hearing evaluation will also include a thorough case history and a visual inspection of the ear canal and eardrum. Additional tests of middle ear function may also be performed. The results of the evaluation can be useful to a physician, if the audiologist believes your hearing loss may benefit from medical intervention.
Results of the hearing evaluation are plotted on a graph called an audiogram. The audiogram provides a visual view of your hearing test results across various pitches or frequencies, especially the ones necessary for understanding speech.
The audiogram and results from your speech understanding tests are used to create a prescription by which hearing aids are programmed, if necessary
What are the Different Degrees of Hearing Loss?
After you undergo a hearing evaluation, the results are plotted on a chart called an audiogram. Loudness is plotted from top to bottom. The top of the graph is very quiet and the bottom of the graph is very loud. Frequency, or pitch, from low to high, is plotted from left to right. Hearing level (HL) is measured in decibels (dB) and is described in general categories, not by percentages. The general hearing loss categories used by most hearing professionals are as follows:
● Normal hearing (0 to 25 dB HL)● Mild hearing loss (26 to 40 dB HL)● Moderate hearing loss (41 to 70 dB HL)● Severe hearing loss (71 to 90 dB HL)● Profound hearing loss (greater than 91 dB HL)
What are the Different Types of Hearing Loss?
What are the Different Types of Hearing Loss?
1. Sensorineural hearing loss: When the problem is in the inner ear, a sensorineural hearing loss is the result. This commonly occurs from damage to the small hair cells, or nerve fibers, in the organ of hearing. Sensorineural hearing loss is the most common type of hearing loss and accounts for more than 90 percent of hearing loss in all hearing aid wearers. The most common causes of this hearing loss are age-related changes and noise exposure. Loss may also result from disturbance of inner ear circulation, increased inner ear fluid pressure, or from disturbances of nerve transmission. There are many excellent options for the patient with sensorineural hearing loss.
2. Conductive hearing loss: When there is a problem in the external or middle ear, a conductive hearing impairment occurs. Conductive hearing loss occurs when sound is not conducted efficiently through the ear canal, eardrum, or tiny bones of the middle ear, resulting in a reduction of the loudness of sound that is heard. Conductive losses may result from earwax blocking the ear canal, fluid in the middle ear, middle ear infection, obstruction of the ear canal, perforation (hole) in the eardrum membrane, or disease of any of the three middle ear bones. All conductive hearing losses should be evaluated by a physician to explore medical and surgical options.
3. Mixed hearing loss - When there are problems in the middle and inner ear, a mixed hearing impairment is the result (i.e. conductive and a sensorineural impairment).
4. Auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD): The least common hearing impairment is ANSD. This type of loss requires more in-depth diagnostic testing, including a hearing evaluation with pure tones, otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) and auditory brainstem response (ABR) testing. In this type of hearing loss, the nerve fibers in the organ of hearing typically appear to be functioning well, but a breakdown of the information occurs along the pathway to the brain. A person may still have normal hearing to sounds, but the sound is not encoded properly at the brain. This type of hearing disorder is diagnosed more often in children, due in part to newborn hearing screenings that use automated ABR equipment and routine speech screenings by pediatricians and school systems, but can be present in adults as well.
What are the Signs of Hearing loss in Children?
Hearing loss in children can occur at any time in life from other acquired factors such as ear infections, head trauma, certain medications, and genetic factors. You may suspect your child has a hearing loss if you observe any of the following:
● Failed newborn hearing screening● Delays in speech and language acquisition, including baby babbling● Frequent ear infections● Not startling to loud sounds● Not turning to the location of sounds after six months of age● Difficulty following verbal directions● Daydreaming in many situations● Concerns by school teachers or failed school hearing screening● Loud volume on the TV or radio● Complaints from the child that they cannot hear
A pediatric audiologist is trained to test children of all ages. Any symptom of hearing loss in children should be addressed promptly so that speech, language and academic development are not delayed or impacted.
What Style of Hearing Aid Do I Need?
There are many types of hearing aids today, and the style or device is dependent upon the user's individual needs. There are in-the-ear styles as well as behind-the-ear styles. Also, hearing aid technology has advanced, with many new and improved options from which to choose.
Hearing aids are available in many different sizes and styles, thanks to advancements in digital technology and miniaturization of the internal components. Many of today's hearing aids are considered sleek, compact, and innovative - offering solutions to a wide range of hearing aid users. When selecting a style of hearing aid, the following should be considered:
● The type/degree of the hearing lossPower requirements● Manual dexterity and visual abilitiesBudget● Cosmetics and aesthetics● Skin sensitivities● Anatomical and medical considerations
What are Assistive Listening Devices (ALDs)?
People with all types and degrees of hearing loss can benefit from an assistive listening device (ALD). Since the microphone of a typical hearing aid is worn on or behind your ear, its ability to enhance the talker-to-background-noise ratio is limited. However, ALDs are designed to increase the loudness of a desired voice, such as a radio, television, or a public speaker, without increasing the background noise. This is because the microphone of the assistive listening device is placed close to the talker or device of interest, while the microphone of the hearing aid is always close to the listener.
ALDs include alarm clocks, TV listening systems, telephone amplifying devices, and auditorium-type assistive listening systems. Many newer devices are small, wireless, and compatible with a person's digital hearing aids. Alarms and other home ALDs may be small devices that are placed discreetly on tables, next to the TV, or on the wall.
What is Tinnitus?
Tinnitus is a common disorder affecting over 50 million people in the United States. It is often referred to as "ringing in the ears," although some people hear hissing, roaring, whistling, chirping, or clicking. Tinnitus, often called head noise, is not a disease, but a symptom of another underlying condition of the ear, auditory nerve, or elsewhere. Tinnitus can be intermittent or constant, with single or multiple tones. Its perceived volume can range from very soft to extremely loud.
What Causes Tinnitus?
The exact cause of tinnitus is not known in every case. However, there are several likely factors which may cause tinnitus or make existing head noise worse. These include:
● Noise-induced hearing loss● Wax build-up in the ear canal● Certain medications● Ear or sinus infections● Age-related hearing loss● Ear diseases and disorders● Jaw misalignment● Cardiovascular disease● Certain types of tumors● Thyroid disorders● Head and neck trauma
How is Tinnitus Treated?
Generally, most patients will not need any medical treatment for tinnitus. There are several treatments and measures to help with the management of tinnitus including:
● Listening to a fan or radio● Tinnitus-masking devices● Biofeedback training● Avoidance measures● Avoidance of certain medications● Hearing aids, if the listener also has a hearing loss
If these measures do not work, there are several medications that have been utilized to suppress tinnitus. Some patients benefit with these drugs and others do not. Each patient has an individual response to medication, and what works for one patient may not work for another.
Audiologist versus Hearing Aid Dispenser: What is the difference?
There are vast differences in the professional roles in diagnosing and treatment of hearing loss. It is still common today for someone to get screened, tested, or fitted with a hearing aid by someone and still not know what qualifications that person had. How do you know who you can trust? An important distinction to understand when treating your hearing loss is the difference between an Audiologist and a hearing aid dispenser. An Audiologist is a Doctor of Audiology who is extensively trained in the science of hearing; while a hearing aid dispenser applies for a license after meeting some basic requirements (see below).
Audiologist: An Audiologist is trained to diagnose, treat and monitor disorders of the hearing and balance system. They are trained in anatomy and physiology, amplification devices, cochlear Implants, electrophysiology, acoustics, psychophysics and auditory rehabilitation. Doctors of Audiology complete, at a minimum, an undergraduate and doctoral level degree in audiology, as well as a supervised externship prior to state licensure and national certification. This usually requires 8 years of post-secondary education (4 years of college and 4 years of graduate school). The graduate school years focus on the medical, diagnostic and rehabilitative aspects of hearing loss, hearing aids and the vestibular system. Upon completion of training, Audiologists must also pass a national standardized examination in order to be eligible for state licensure. Continuing education requirements must be met in order for an Audiologist to maintain state licensure.
Hearing Aid Dispenser: A hearing aid dispenser is licensed to perform audiometric testing for the sole purpose of selling and fitting hearing aids. In order to obtain a license, hearing aid dispensers are required to pass an exam. Prior to taking the exam, certain requirements must be met, which vary from state to state. In many states, hearing aid dispensers are only required to have a high school diploma. In other states, hearing aid dispensers must complete two years of college or post-secondary education in any field prior to applying for licensure. Some states require completion of distance learning coursework prior to taking the exam.
In summary, the requirement for state licensure to dispense hearing aids is based on the minimum education necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the patient. The differences in education required for Audiologists versus hearing aid dispensers reflect the significantly larger range of professional practices that Audiologists are permitted to engage in.
Audiologists are highly trained degree professionals. Audiologists receive extensive training in assessment of hearing, diagnosis, fitting and adjustment of hearing aids that helps to ensure:
● An accurate diagnosis;● An appropriate treatment plan of intervention;● A positive outcome from the hearing aid.


text:
Online events / Lectures & discussions 7 Mar 2024 Online event Vindolanda: a window on life in the Roman army . Online event . Explore the realities of fort life on Rome's northernmost frontier through some of the oldest surviving handwritten documents in Britain. Book now
Demonstration 8 Mar 2024 – 26 Apr 2024 Free The way of tea . Free . Discover the history of tea drinking and gathering in Japan in this free demonstration of a Japanese tea ceremony. Find out more about The way of tea
Sleepover 9 Mar 2024 – 9 Jun 2024 Book now British Museum sleepover: Awesome ancient Rome . Book now . Experience the Museum after dark and discover a world of evil emperors, ferocious fighters and magical myths. Book now
Film / Members' exclusive £28 (Members) 16 Mar 2024 Book now Behind the screens: 'Gladiator' . Book now . Join us for an unforgettable afternoon of cinema and historical discussion with a special screening of the 2000 smash hit 'Gladiator'. Book now
Performance £10 24 Mar 2024 Sold out Ovid's Metamorphoses . Sold out . Inspired by Ovid's tales of transformation, Hugh Lupton and Daniel Morden breathe life into some of the most famous myths in the world. Sold out
Lectures & discussions / Members' exclusive £16 (Members) 25 Mar 2024 Book now The Seven Wonders of the Ancient World . Book now . Explore the ancient world's most impressive creations with bestselling historian Bettany Hughes. Book now
Lectures & discussions / Members' exclusive £16 (Members) 15 Apr 2024 Book now Introducing Michelangelo: the last decades . Book now . Discover the upcoming exhibition 'Michelangelo: the last decades' with lead exhibition curator Sarah Vowles. Book Introducing Michelangelo: the last decades now
Performance £10 21 Apr 2024 Book now Woyengi and the Medicine Woman . Book now . Storyteller Jan Blake brings a rare slice of Nigerian myth to the British Museum stage. Book now
Lectures & discussions / Members' exclusive £16 (Members) 22 Apr 2024 Book now The Bayeux Tapestry . Book now . Explore this epic account of a pivotal moment in English history and the discover the rich narrative behind its stitches. Book The Bayeux Tapestry now
Performance £10 12 May 2024 Book now The Tantric Ten . Book now . Expect life, death, creation, destruction and sacrifice, all in search of cosmic truth within this captivating performance. Book now
Lectures & discussions / Members' exclusive £16 (Members) 13 May 2024 Book now The Cleopatras . Book now . Discover the real story behind the female powerhouses of the Ptolemaic Dynasty and the tragic legend of the last queen of Egypt. Book now
Lectures & discussions / Members' exclusive £16 (Members) 3 Jun 2024 Book now Goddesses in Greek myth . Book now . From Athene to Aphrodite, join Natalie Haynes to reassess the Greek goddesses by combining historical insight with a dose of humour. Book now


text:
Join or Sign In
Sign in to customize your TV listings
By joining TV Guide, you agree to our Terms of Use and acknowledge the data practices in our Privacy Policy.
Are you ready to go back to Llanview? The online reboot of One Life to Live premieres Monday, more than 15 months after the soap's broadcast finale aired on ABC. So, what should fans expect from the new version? Will it still feel like the same show or will longtime viewers feel like something is off? And will new viewers be completely lost if they start watching now? We have answers to all your burning questions:
Are you ready to go back to Llanview?
The online reboot of One Life to Live premieres Monday, more than 15 months after the soap's broadcast finale aired on ABC. So, what should fans expect from the new version? Will it still feel like the same show or will longtime viewers feel like something is off? And will new viewers be completely lost if they start watching now? We have answers to all your burning questions:
1. How do I watch it? First things first. One Life to Live and All My Children have made the switch to online, and both series will be available through Hulu (www.hulu.com) as well as iTunes — meaning viewers can now watch the shows on their computers, iPhones, iPads, Apple TVs, regular TVs (through a Blu-Ray player), and a host of other digital media devices. Each week, new episodes of each show will debut at 5 a.m. ET Mondays through Thursdays. On Fridays, half-hour recap episodes for each show will be made available. For longtime viewers who are nervous about wading into the waters of online TV viewing, actor Jerry verDorn, who plays Clint Buchanan, assures: "It's so easy. ... And the older fans, they can always call their nephew or the niece or a young kid off the street and say, 'Hook me up with Hulu.'"
TV Scorecard: What's renewed? What's canceled?
2. What are the biggest changes? The biggest changes happened behind the scenes, starting with the set location. Both One Life to Live and All My Children are now filmed in Stamford, Conn. Secondly, their running times have been trimmed to 30 minutes per episode. The series also has a new intro and theme song produced by none other than rapper Snoop Lion (née Dogg), which actor Robert S. Woods calls "the best one since Peabo Bryson's." In addition, many of the key One Life to Live players — including head writer Ron Carlivati and actors Michael Easton, Kristen Alderson and Roger Howarth — defected to General Hospital while Prospect Park and The Online Network were still hammering out the details of the OLTL reboot. And finally, OLTL has a new showrunner — Jennifer Pepperman, a former coordinating producer and associate director on the series.
3. Will all the old characters be back? Some, but not all. As mentioned above, Easton and Alderson (who play John McBain and Starr Manning) have moved on to Port Charles. And Howarth is headed that way too, albeit after a brief stint in Llanview. But many fan favorites, including Nora (Hillary B. Smith), Bo (Woods), Blair (Kassie DePaiva), Viki (Erika Slezak), Clint (verDorn), Cutter (Josh Kelly), Natalie (Melissa Archer), Dorian (Robin Strasser) and even David Vickers (Tuc Watkins), will be returning. In addition, while the characters Destiny and Matthew will be returning, their faces won't be familiar. Robert Gorrie is taking over the role of Matthew from Eddie Alderson, and Laura Harrier is replacing Shenell Edmonds as Destiny.
Get the scoop on 39 must-see season finales
4. What's happened, plot-wise, during the hiatus? The online reboot picks up six months after the show's finale on ABC. And while we don't want to give away too much of what happens in the first episode, it's safe to say that a lot has gone down in those six months — and not everything will be explained right away. A quick summary of some of the major players: Dorian returns from Washington, D.C. to find herself embroiled in a political scandal thanks to a story in The Banner, and reconnects with David Vickers.Cutter and Blair have formed an unlikely business partnership to open the new nightclub Shelter. Natalie is embracing single motherhood but still feeling "a little lost," according to actress Melissa Archer. And while Bo and Nora are having some drama with their son Matthew, their marriage is stronger than ever. "It's like the old days," Woods tells TVGuide.com. "They're not bickering. They're supporting each other." Adds Smith: "I think Bo and Nora fans will be really happy with the first [few] episodes. ... It's a reconnection of Bo and Nora, which hadn't happened in a long time." But what about the biggest cliffhanger of the finale — Todd (Howarth) being arrested for Victor's murder, paired with the big reveal that Victor is actually still alive? Their worlds will collide again in the online premiere, but you'll have to tune in to find out how.
5. Are there going to be new characters? Yes. Among the new characters introduced in the first episode is Jeffrey King, played by High School Musical alum Corbin Bleu. King is a hungry young journalist who's trying to move up from freelancer to full-time reporter at The Banner. "He's very savvy," Bleu tells TVGuide.com. "He's very quick, very motivated and very power-hungry. There is a great sort of power struggle between Viki and him." Down the road, Jersey Shore star Jenni "JWOWW " Farley turns in a guest appearance as a bartender, and rapper Riff Raff plays art dealer Jamie Franko.
Fond farewells: Shows we lost this season
6. Will the show look the same? Yes and no. The external locations and some of the sets are different, and even technically speaking, the new version has made some changes — using varying camera angles and video equipment like jibs and Steadicams, which will give the scenes an updated appearance. "They really enhance the look and the feel the show without changing it," Josh Kelly tells TVGuide.com. "The bottom line is, they are more expensive to use, and it looks more expensive."
7. Is the tone different? Though the show's writing staff is almost entirely new, the transition has been seamless. "I think they did their research, if you will," Kelly says. "My character felt like my character. It didn't feel like they were writing a different one. It felt similar to what it was before." Also, now that it's online, One Life to Live is definitely a little more racy. In the first episode alone, there are a handful of words that wouldn't have made it past ABC's censors. And look for the sex scenes to get a little steamier. "Because you don't have a network, you have the capability to make things a lot edgier and a lot sexier, and they're pushing the envelope with it. They really are," explains new cast member Bleu. "To the point that when I read the first episode, I was surprised. Because it's not the same One Life to Live that my grandmother used to watch."
Vote for your favorite Amazon original pilots!
8. I've never seen One Life to Live before. Why should I start watching now? If sex and scandals are your thing, this is the show for you. As Bleu said, this isn't your grandparents' One Life to Live. "It's young, it's hip, it's fresh," JWOWW assured TVGuide.com at the show's premiere in New York City last week. With so many story lines packed into a 30-minute episode, the segments go by in a flash — and it's surprisingly easy to pick up. "I can 100 percent say that I feel it's a lot less soap-y," Melissa Archer tells TVGuide.com. "When I watched it, [I thought], wow, this looks like a CW show. It looks like a good, fun program that I would watch [even] if I didn't like daytime [TV]. And if I do like daytime, even better."
Are you planning to watch the online version of One Life to Live? Vote in our poll! And check out a One Life to Live catch-up video below.
One Life to Live will be available on Hulu and iTunes beginning Monday at 5 a.m. ET.


text:
| ||||||||||
Shop - Detailed view - Walnut (Black Walnut) veneer
Sorry, we're out of stock for this veneer. Please use the search box on the overview page to find a similar one. We are striving to present the veneers true to the original. As veneer is a natural product small differences (e.g. in the colour) may be possible in the photos and descriptions. But you will receive the veneer from the shown bundle. Back to overview | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||


text:
Case 14 never ends, yet now comes ...
CASE 15 - Kyozan Plants His Mattock (Axe) In The Ground
So many of the Koans sing of the relative and the absolute, separate things & people as the Dance of Emptiness.
Thus, the question "where did you come from?"
The response: "I came to up here from down over there" ... even as a sharp blade edge pierces "Just This".
A follow-up question: "How many were in the field down there with you?"
One being stands silently and tall (The Buddha said: I alone am the world honored one) ... then heads back down to work with the others in their labors.
So, which is it? Here, there, now or then, up or down? One or many? Or Thus which dances all of that?
I say ... YES!
In the Preface to the Assembly ...
The silent utterance before a word is spoken speaks all the books in the library! The darkness where all separate forms vanish is also, at the flip of a switch, the light were the separate people and things suddenly appear! (A famous poem, "The Identity of Relative and Absolute" sings: "The dark makes all words one; the brightness distinguishes good and bad phrases") One monk bows, and the whole temple springs into activity! In deep wholeness and interbeing, when there is dancing in the courtyard, a head nods to the beat in the backyard (another famous Koan is "When Tom catches cold, Mary Sneezes" **).
** And don't think that Mary sneezes simply because she caught Tom's germs and now has a cold of her own too. There is that, but It is much more intimate ... for Tom's cold is precisely Mary sneezing. The courtyard sweeps in the backyard, and a single monk is the whole Buddha temple.
- Tell a real story from your life exemplifying how you came up from the field of some hard labors, and headed back down to "get 'er done" ... yet all is "Just This"?
- Can you express your understanding of how your own individual "bowing/dancing/catching cold" ... is precisely and intimately others & the whole world "springing into action/nodding/sneezing"?
Gassho, J