Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to despise the term "manshape" with a vengeance

269 replies

figcake · 21/01/2011 22:16

.. and close down all threads where it appears (it appears to be catching on).. bring back "hubby" pleeeeeeese

OP posts:
weedle · 22/01/2011 23:24

There's a Bedshaped - Keane sang a whole song about it!!

scottishmummy · 22/01/2011 23:26

aye,good call on that

cantspel · 23/01/2011 02:59

I opened this thread thinking it was about mens underwearGrin as the only manshape i have ever heard of is a pretty nasty brand of mens support underwear.

I am pretty new here and have no idea who Dee is but now when ever i do come across her and she talks about manshape i will get a picture in my mind of an aging bloke in support pantsBlush

Sorry to Dee if he is a sex god but the link has now been formedSmile

TyraG · 23/01/2011 07:25

When I saw this post, the word "manshape" conjured memories of the Seinfeld episode with the "manzier".

Now knowing what it means, it does seem a bit derogatory. I agree with other posters who've suggested that the term "womanshape" would not be as well received. Personally I'd be upset if I knew that DH was referring to me in that manner.

I don't particularly care for the term baby dancing, but I don't mind hubby, although I sometimes call mine hubs, the hubster or the hubinator just for shits and giggles.

I haven't used the term Aunt Flo in 20 years (back in High School) we also used the term The Red-Headed Stranger.

deemented · 23/01/2011 07:37

That's just it, Tyra - manshape isn't actually bothered about what i call him. He finds it amusing. By his own admission he has been called much much worse. He can't understand what all the fuss is actually about tbh, and neither can i. It's never said in a derogatory context at all and it just works for us.

scottishmummy - i don't know, is there? And why does it matter so much?

TyraG · 23/01/2011 07:40

Well if he doesn't mind then more power to ya! Smile

Fitzwilliam · 23/01/2011 10:43

It's such a difficult one. Because clearly a lot of people don't like it and this thread has been done multiple times. So it is a word that clearly offends people.

Does the intention outweigh people's dislike of a word? Does Dee saying it with utter affection mean that it doesn't matter that the word itself is quite viscerally disliked by many people? Well ordinarily I'd argue no. Because if you have a term of endearment for somebody, then the endearment is in using it to that person. It's private. As we don't share it as a term of reference, it's not our name for that person, it jars to read it. And on a shared forum, we have a shared language. We say dh, dp, oh etc because we are a community. We agree not to use text speak or to SHOUT WHEN POSTING. It makes us belong. We don't all use our own little terms (particularly when they are so unpalatable to so many).

But all that said, there are exceptions to every rule. Dee has her reasons and the majority accept them and tolerate the name. It is an extraordinary situation and one that doesn't conform I suppose to normal rules.

But while language is the powerful tool it is and MN as big as it is, people will dislike the term and they will say this on here without knowing why dee uses it.

I never, ever, ever refer to dh by his real name or as my 'husband' or 'partner'. We've been together since we were teenagers and I call him something nobody else in the world calls him, but I would never, ever use it on here as it's my name for him. And he's dh on here. 'DH' doesn't mean dear husband to me. Because 'dh' refers to a person. I just use the acronym in order to be understood on here. Because as dee is arguing, it's the intention that matters. But I understand why dp (or df now) might be hard for dee all the same.

marantha · 23/01/2011 12:36

Nothing is more wanky than 'partner'.

marantha · 23/01/2011 12:41

It always bemuses me when some people here use it ('partner') to describe their love interest who is obviously a completely evil bastard because of its association with smug, new age types who just don't need to be married as they are 'as one' without it, e.g.
'My dp keeps me locked up in the shed for 3 days at a time without food, sleeps with my best friends and beats me with a chain twice a day.'
That'll be your abusive boyfriend.
Husband is perfectly OK because it is an objective word with no associations of smugness.

JaneS · 23/01/2011 13:00
Grin

You have not seen many newlyweds, have you, marantha?

I'd like to know what's 'objective' about calling the man I live with a word that means 'thing that keeps the house together', too.

No words are 'objective' really, are they?

southeastastra · 23/01/2011 13:02

i was saying dee was being calm as she has had to explain herself again and again on numerous similar threads! just saying she was dealing with it calmly as i know i would find it hard.

fgs if that's ok with some of you Hmm

marantha · 23/01/2011 13:03

Well, LittleRedDragon husband IS objective.
If a person has been through a legally recognised marriage service conducted by an official govt representative they ARE married.
I may think my husband is a bastard and the worst expletives in the world OR I may think him to be a saint and wonderful, nevertheless as a legal spouse he is my husband.

marantha · 23/01/2011 13:06

Now I'm not saying that the fact he is my husband is good or bad just that he is.
Husband is a word like mother or father, subjectivity doesn't come into it; they either are or they are not.

JaneS · 23/01/2011 13:22

No, it's not objective. I've just explained why. It far predates the legal situation you describe. I don't think there's such a thing as objective language, is there?

marantha · 23/01/2011 13:27

Maybe it does predate the legal situation I describe, however, if someone were to say here (the UK), 'This is my husband', I do not think anyone would think that they meant anything other than a man who was legally wed to the woman.
The legal tie would be implicit- it would to me anyway and I think to everybody else.

Mumcentreplus · 23/01/2011 13:31
Hmm
JaneS · 23/01/2011 13:40
Confused

I think we're talking cross-purposes.

I think it's daft to talk about this word in the context of dee as a poster - she didn't invent it, she's not the only who uses it, she and her manshape are perfectly happy with its use, and half of us didn't even realize it wasn't, for example, the MN sign-in of her bloke.

But that doesn't mean that any terms somehow become 'objective'. I can't see how that's not just a circular argument (my case wins because I say my case is best, so there).

marantha · 23/01/2011 14:12

'Manshape' is fine -it's got a bit of humour to it.

JaneS · 23/01/2011 14:19

Yes, I like it for that reason. Smile

New posts on this thread. Refresh page