Wordslut: A Feminist Guide to Taking Back the English Language

Product Information

It was well researched and cited throughout. It took a look at many different issues from a variety of perspectives, and argued both sides. It managed to be intersectional in its feminism and the way topics were discussed. Though it was so broad in the things it brought forward, it managed to also be so focused in what it was saying and really hammer down on an issue. The writing was perfectly succinct and there was no babble or unnecessary tangents, it made for a great reading experience. My attention never waned and I just found myself wanting more and more from this book. It was also unexpectedly funny, which set a great tone for reading/listening. Chaucer uses sluttish (late 14c.) in reference to the appearance of an untidy man. Slut also came to mean "a kitchen maid, a scullery drudge" (mid-15c.); in 18c. hard pieces in a bread loaf from imperfect kneading were called slut's pennies; dust left to gather on a floor was slut's wool). Shakespeare, William. As You Like It (III, iii, 1531–1537). "[Audrey:] Well, I am not fair; and therefore I pray the gods make me / honest. / [Touchstone:] Truly, and to cast away honesty upon a foul slut were / to put good meat into an unclean dish. / [Audrey:] I am not a slut, though I thank the gods I am foul. / [Touchstone:] Well, praised be the gods for thy foulness; / sluttishness may come hereafter...." The meaning "woman of low or loose character, bold hussy," if not intended in the earliest use, is attested by mid-15c., but the primary sense through 18c. was "woman who is uncleanly as regards her person or house." Johnson has it (second definition) as "A word of slight contempt to a woman" but sexual activity does not seem to figure into his examples. Playful use of the word, "young woman, wench," without implication of messiness or loose morals, is attested by 1660s:

More or less entirely written about white US people/language. If you're going to talk about 'reclaiming the English language' it's a bit, oh, American-imperialist barely to notice that American English is but one dialect of many. (There are various mentions of AAVE but no sustained look or chapter on non-white, still less non-US, English.) If you're going to do a section on sexual swearing that basically implies women who use 'cunt' are letting the side down by using misogynist terms in an unexamined way, how about talking to some English, Scots, Australians? Or romance / erotica writers, come to that? I enjoyed every second of this book and had a problem putting down the audiobook. It was both thought-provoking and entertaining. I love that the author included a lot of historical contexts to words and their meanings. So yeah, lots of good stuff in here. I admit, it was probably especially delightful for my personal consumption as it feeds into and reinforces a lot of my own opinions about the patriarchy and society. I'm totally the target audience and I ate it up as such. All in all, this book is fun with lots of novel and interesting tidbits into linguistics. Her analysis on linguistics as it reflects society adds to the flare and fun.When I tell you that this was one of the most mind blowing and interesting books I have read in a long time, I’m not even exaggerating. I could not stop regurgitating information I learned from this book to everyone around me while I was reading it - I was just so fascinated by what I was learning. A couple of chapters in this book BLEW my mind. They put into words how I felt in many conversations, especially in the workplace, and spoke about how language creates or enforces power structures. I also loved how Montell spoke about how women tend to converse horizontally, layering thoughts in a collaborative manner, while men tend to converse vertically, in a series of monologues which aim to establish a power dynamic. Chapter 3 is GREAT. This here is one of the best examples of feminist books even though it does not really try to be one. Linguistics is a passion of mine and Amanda Montell creates a well-researched, elegantly-constructed and balanced nonfiction on the patriarchal and misogynistic effects on the everyday language. Each chapter provides insightful information as to how language evolved over time and the author approaches the issue from sociolinguistic point of view, which fascinated me throughout the book. I loved the insights on gender-biased insults, grammar corrections, language of marginalized groups, the naturally patriarchal evolution of language, the challenges women face without even noticing when they open their mouths to speak (including mansplaining).

Devon, Natasha (15 October 2014). "Is there a male equivalent to calling a woman a 'slut'?". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 12 January 2022 . Retrieved 2 December 2016.

From the late 20th century, there have been attempts to reclaim the word, exemplified by various SlutWalk parades, and some individuals embrace the title as a source of pride. [7] [ bettersourceneeded] [8] Etymology, common usages and synonyms There are lots of good things in here, especially the analysis of 'like'. There's an interesting section on how women talk amongst themselves (much more collaborative than men, 'horizontal' rather than 'vertical' structured conversations) which would have been a lot more interesting with a bit more depth. How do trans women, nonbinary people, people who belong to a third or fourth or fifth gender in societies that have them, speak among themselves? We don't know because despite a section on how there aren't just Men and Women, and a chapter on queer speech, we hear very little about anyone except Men (dudes, bros) and Women throughout the book.