Hello. Have thought the same stuff about the names and surnames bit, and then decided that there are too many angles to it in terms of history, cultural identity, kinship etc. to attempt a coherent reduction, though I suppose it is possible. But it is different for women and men, isn't it? For starters, the man bit in wo-man is a subtly undermining surname type of thing, isn't it?And hey, tap, tap:)
True, I have thought about the implication of the word "woman" too, but I guess it is too difficult to start calling ourselves something else, and "lady" sounds very pretentious.I think the ideal would be to arrive at some kind of state where a name would only identify you, and not stereotype you. Where it is common for partners and families to have different names. Where a name does not imply you belong to a particular race, religion, or even gender. With many inter-race and inter-religious pairings happening, we might get there sometime. :)
Hehehe, cute. I could expect pretty much the same response from P1. We both often do random sanity tests for each other ;-)
Why is he called P1?
Because he always expects to be priority 1 in his own and others' lives.No.Seriously. His name is Pawan, and "i-me-moi.blogspot.com" used to call him Povuuuuun (pyaar se) and eventually it turned into P1. And, naturally, I became P2.As if this wasn't enough, a very close friend of ours, who has the same name as me with the "i" missing, was called P3. Talk about ripple effect!
Post a comment