Hi Sarandha
I appreciate your perspective about the word and the historical context you have given. I didn't think In detail/research about the 'single or 'married' part. So I appreciate what you have written in detail about it.
But please understand that I am making a larger point about policing of words in the forum, which directly curtails the freedom of speech. I am not passionate about the word 'mistress' as such.
When you say this - "it cannot be offensive to a certain class of people if employed in another social context where it can be considered demeaning for a partner against whom it is used simply because she is a woman."
I felt that one small section of people shouldn't really define the code of conduct for an entire public forum with what they think are the negative connotations attached to any word. You have given historical context where single men might have keeps or mistresses. But how many people really associate mistresses with single men in India? As I said, for the Indian subcontinent, the historical context is of 'doosri aurat'. It clearly means that there is already another lady in the background.
Also, when you say that people use the word derogatorily, my rationale is still the same that the meaning itself is derogation. A mistress is condemned because of her acts, not the word.
Historical context which you have mentioned, I am sure can be found in bible, books, etc as you are suggesting. And I would never negate the truth, for the sake of arguement. But historical context is interpreted and understood by the people. If we quote the holy Quran/bible/Vedas and then bring out a word which, in the past had derogatory meaning, can we just tell the general public to stop using it in a public forum, because we feel so? I do not agree to that. Having an open mind and talking to people with different perspectives is not wrong. If someone wants to condemn a character why can't that person do just that? By using the very word which defines the act.
I feel that the code of conduct should definitely define that expletives or abuses are not to be used. But again, mistress is not in that category at all. If it had been considered widely in the same category as that of abuses, in the mind of general public, then it would have already been in the current code of conduct of the forum. This re-inforces my point of the word being sensitive to a very small portion of the public here. Which can't form the basis of moral policing or stifling of the written speech for the entire audience, who don't feel that the word itself is degrading or an abuse.
That's my view.
Edited by mansimat - 13 years ago
Anupamaa
