Alphabetical Entries: W
127 entries found.
waiter, server, attendant, table/restaurant server; serving staff. Plural: waiters, servers, waitstaff.
although it theoretically could refer to either sex, it's reserved for women/girls and it reflects outdated customs and attitudes.
this is used only for women, holding them to a higher arbitrary moral standard than men are held to. If you must use it, do so gender-fairly to describe behavior but not people ("They behaved wantonly," not "They were wanton").
were there ever any war grooms? Retain in historical contexts.
although studies show that the tendency toward warfare is characteristic of men across many cultures (the only nonbiological characteristic that can be attributed consistently to one sex), distrust generalizations: many men have devoted their lives to peace issues and some women are hawks.
replace this imprecise term with a description of who is doing what to whom. "Terrorism is not an enemy but a technique" (Zbigniew Brzezinski, Washington Post). Peter Beinart (also in the Washington Post) agrees that "war on terror" has always been a flawed term, since terror is a tactic, not an enemy. Historian and writer Howard Zinn said that "the category of 'terrorism' continues to be applied selectively, and in a way that serves the goals of U.S. policies, despite the fact that these very policies often cause or support more human suffering than is caused by the so-called 'terrorists' the United States opposes. Ultimately this leads to operative official definitions of 'terrorism' that are so vague and redundant as to defy logic...." Ross Glover (Collateral Language) points out at that the word "terrorism is so vague, the BBC World Service has stopped using the term altogether." See also war/war on.
Richard E. Norred (Los Angeles Times) wonders "if we as a nation can couch any issue except in terms of war." We've seen the war on poverty, the war on drugs, the war on terrorism, the cultural wars, and the mommy wars. Ross Glover (Collateral Language) says, "'The War on—' plays on our competitive heartstrings like a football cheer. 'Yes,' we seem to respond, 'fight the good fight, O fearless President, fight the war for us, fight the war for the good of humanity, but most importantly just fight.' It matters little that most fights end up only wasting time, money, and lives, or that every time we begin fighting, conditions get worse rather than better." "Obviously, it makes no sense to wage war on a tactic or on an abstract noun.... That this usage could be accepted so widely attests to the fact that our political vocabulary, along with our general political culture, has become extraordinarily debased" (Andrew Levine, Political Keywords). How debased? It's likely that the national familiarity with "war on" language kept us from realizing after 9/11 the critical importance of "the decision to describe the attacks in the language of 'war' rather than as a criminal act" (Brent Cunningham, "The Rhetoric Beat," Columbia Journalism Review) "so that by Sept. 13 the assumption that America was 'at war' with all of that idea's sobering implications, was irrevocably established in the national consciousness. Polls released on September 12 indicated that more than 90% of respondents considered the attacks as an 'act of war.'" Had 9/11 been described instead as "mass murder," the response would have fallen under the domain of police investigation, criminal justice, and the safeguards of law (as correctly happened in the 2013 Boston marathon killings). Cunningham proceeds to lay out the logic that followed: once talk of war is established, a national enemy must be identified. The invasion of Iraq was the solution. Heretofore, the U.S. and other countries have treated terrorist attacks as a breach of civil and criminal law—the idea is to deny the perpetrators legitimacy and thereby defuse the political power of their actions. Investigations, trials, convictions were the primary response to Pan Am Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, and embassies bombed in east Africa in 1998. Careless use of "war" or "war on" has consequences. Rephrase such phrases to accurately describe the issues. And why is going to "war" so attractive? Arthur Silber says that "a huge swath of our economy is now devoted to preparing for war, making war, and cleaning up after war. To one degree or another, most members of Congress are beholden to the economic powers that drive the obsessive concern with war, and its cornucopia of economic opportunity. Both parties are enmeshed in the War State, and the current corporatist warmaking apparatus devours almost all those who go into public service. Until this intricate and complex system is altered, nothing else will change, except in comparatively superficial ways." See also military language, war on terror.
wardrobe supervisor/manager/clerk/handler/department/coordinator.
witch (female) and warlock (male) are strong, evenly balanced words when used together. If you want sex-neutral alternatives, consider conjurer, sorcerer, magician.
because of the sex-linked "lord," consider using military commander/leader, supreme military leader, militarist, warmonger, jingoist. Another caution is using the term fairly; Joan Steinau Lester (The Future of White Men and Other Diversity Dilemmas), says "Warlords? This is a term reserved exclusively for Asians and Africans abroad, and African-American or Latino gang leaders at home. Europeans in a similar feudal spot were 'lords of the manor'—or, if they were especially warlike, 'knights.'"
this is considered offensive and disparaging. In any case, it's an overworked cliché that wants to be retired. See also American Indian, pow-wow, renegades, sports teams' names and mascots.
both women and men have been and are warriors—whether this means fighting in battles or living out the warrior archetype. In The Warrior Queens, Antonia Fraser describes female warrior-rulers who have often been the focus for what a country afterwards perceives to have been its golden age, for example, Queen Elizabeth I of England, 12th-century Queen Tamara of Georgia, or 15th-century Queen Isabella of Spain. In more recent times, women have taken part in every American military crisis since the Revolutionary War. Harriet Tubman planned and led a military campaign for the Union Army in South Carolina in 1863. At least some men—the traditional warriors—are becoming "new warriors" today. Acknowledging and coming to terms with the warrior within, the new warrior is ideally without guilt, shame, or apology about being a man; both fierce and compassionate, he holds himself accountable for his actions. Feeling truly powerful, he does not need to dominate anyone. He directs his considerable energy in constructive, nonthreatening ways and is able to renew connections with self, others, and the world. See also Amazon/amazon, warrior (Indian).
Indians were always called warriors, where in other circumstances, in other lands, they would have been called soldiers. Consider the implications of the words "soldier" and "warrior" as they are used for various conflicts. See also renegades.
launderer, laundry worker, cleaner, drycleaner.
long mis-identified as "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant," this simplistic synonym for oppression, discrimination, and spurious superiority is actually "Wealthy Anglo-Saxon Protestant." Because "Anglo-Saxon" refers to white, "White Anglo-Saxon" is redundant. As the gulf between extremely rich and extremely poor continues to grow, it may be important to recognize that component of bigotry. On the other hand, you will serve your audience better if you avoid the cliché and choose specific adjectives.
security guard, watch, night guard/watch, guard, building guard, security officer/consultant, gatekeeper, guardian, sentry, sentinel, lookout, caretaker, custodian, patrol, patroller; guardian; crossing tender/guard.
water carrier.
water dowser.
swimming/boating/rowing/sailing/water sports skills, canoeing expertise, etc. Or, reword to describe the person with these skills: competent swimmer, professional boater, skilled canoeist, veteran rower, proficient/expert/talented/knowledgeable/skillful swimmer/boater.
Robin Morgan (in Sisterhood Is Forever) says that "wave" terminology (first wave feminism, second wave feminism, third wave feminism) is accurate "only if we define feminism narrowly: polite organizing done in the U.S. by primarily white, middle-class women, for a limited number of equal rights (however important) attainable under the social, economic, and political status quo. And 'wave' terminology makes no sense internationally. There were twelfth-century harem revolts in what is now Turkey; Christine de Pisan penned her furious feminist tracts in 13th-century France; all-female armies fought for women's rights in China during the 1780s White Lotus Rebellion, the 1851 Taiping Rebellion, and the 1899 Boxer Rebellion; Gandhi acknowledged that he copied his nonviolent resistance tactics from the Indian women's rights movement; Argentina's Feminist Party was founded as early as 1918—you get the point. 'Wave' oversimplification makes no sense domestically, either. Beverly Guy-Sheftall's essay [in Sisterhood Is Forever] on black feminism is a superb example of the buried history of activism by U.S. women of color, from colonial times through slavery, westward expansion, and immigration, to the present.... Actually, today's Women's Movement is more like 'the ten thousandth wave.'" Avoid categorizations unless put in some meaningful context. See also feminism, feminisms.
the way to a person's heart is through their stomach (see singular "they"); the quickest way to the heart is through the stomach, the way to the heart is through the stomach.