z

Young Writers Society



Is the English Language sexist? (Essay)

by BenFranks


Done for English language. Looking for tips on quality of argument, point-making and grammar.

Thank you. You can discuss the subject of the essay here.

-----------

Is the English Language sexist?

This question, at first glance, bears an assumed answer of ‘no’ to a general audience of people who have used and breathed the language for most of their lives. However, this is mainly due to the very fact that we simply haven’t noticed it. We’re ignorant to whether or not it is because the sole traditional values and sexist views has, essentially, shaped the way we think as people and also how we have been brought up. Therefore we rarely tend to question it. Sure enough though, our minds soon change when we’re opened up to example and reference of numerous ways our language – or at least the connotations we hold with it – are clearly sexist. In this short essay, I will describe exactly why it is I have come to this conclusion.

The English language is firstly built upon the ideology that “the male is the norm phenomenon”. This means that we refer to humans as “man” and other potentially sexist generalisations. On top of this, there are the problems surrounding Lexical Asymmetry in our language. This term is used to describe two words with the same denotation, but generally with an unequal connotation. For example, a woman who sleeps around with lots of men might be labelled a “slut”, which in our perceived society is seen as an insult or a put down; something that makes the person feel less about themselves based on a label. In contrast, a man who sleeps around with lots of women might be labelled a “player”, which in our perceived society is seen as more of a compliment or a gesture of respect for what they’ve done. However, does this really make the language itself sexist or just our ideas about it? This where the ideological theories of the relations between our human minds and language comes in. There are two types: Reflectionism and Determinism. Reflectionism is the theory that language reflects our thoughts; such as someone believing a woman sleeping around with men is unfavourable and labelling them with something profound such as “slut”, or someone believing that a man sleeping around with women is impressive and labelling them with something complimentary such as “player”. Determinism on the other hand is the theory that language influences our thoughts; such as the word “slut” in itself has made us think of it as something bad and the word “player” as something impressive. Therefore, to suggest that Lexical Asymmetry is a birth from reflectionism is to say that connotations of the activity has caused us to think negatively of the word; and that to suggest Lexical Asymmetry is a birth from determinism is to say that the word has led to us creating bad connotations of the activity. My personal opinion is that because language is so old, Lexical Asymmetry has probably been built on over the years due to Reflectionism and Determinism and led us to the modern connotations we have today.

As well as Lexical Asymmetry there are other things that suggest more clearly that the English language and our connotations of it is sexist. Like marked and unmarked terms for example, most of which are derived from such traditional usages that we do not think of them as sexist, when really, to a certain extent, they are. For example, the fact that ‘woman’ is the same as ‘man’, but unlike ‘girl’ and ‘boy’ ‘woman’ is a marked term; as is ‘female’ in contrast with ‘male’. So does this mean that the English language is being sexist in the sense that we feel the need to almost create the illusion that a girl is part of a boy? Or does it just mean that age-old traditional views on woman’s roles in society have influenced our language to create these marked terms? I personally think that marking terms is sexist towards females, but the only reason we tolerate this is because it has been the accepted term for so long, and I believe language takes generations to change. Other examples, perhaps more modern, are terms such as ‘actress’ as opposed to ‘actor’ and ‘usherette’ as opposed to ‘usher’. In comparison with words such as ‘kitchenette’ the connotation of these marked terms is that the female’s term is associated with being smaller or less important than a male’s term. However, because these terms aren’t as buried into history, they’re easier to change. These days, some female actors refuse to be called actresses and slowly but surely change is coming around and the more modern marked terms are being used less so every day.

Similarly to marked terms is the English language’s gender pre-modifiers. A gender pre-modifier is the fancy name for referring to the gender of a person’s employment title. For example, when a female is working as a doctor it is expected that they are given the title ‘lady doctor’ instead of simply ‘doctor’. However, unlike the other examples that are sexist, there is sexism against males with pre-modifiers too; this is in the modern reference to a male whom is working as a nurse is called a ‘male nurse’ instead of just a nurse. At first impressions this looks simply sexist towards males, but it displays sexism towards females too. Calling them a ‘male nurse’ creates the ideas that a nurse should be a female’s job and therefore feminising the term and creating an illusion that a nurse is a female’s ‘place’ in society.

Insulting usages are ways in which the English language displays a semantic over representation. This means that there is a lexical gap when we insult people because of their sex. For example, not only are there more insulting usages for women, but also the connotations surrounding insulting usages for females are generally perceived as far worse than the connotations surrounding insulting usages for males. For example the word ‘whore’, which is generally used to insult women who sleep around, can also be used against males; however the key difference to note is that when it is, it is often a marked term as ‘whore’ becomes ‘man-whore’. Essentially this is sexist in itself, but also the connotations surrounding a ‘whore’ appear more negative than with ‘man-whore’ because we associate the ideas of a man sleeping around as being successful and a women sleeping around as wrong.

So, when I ask myself if the English language is sexist, I have come to the conclusion that it is. However, I believe that this is because it has been influenced over many years by our literature, traditional views and age-old terms, built upon a mix of Determinism and Reflectionism to create what we now see as our modern language; these connotations are passed on from generation to generation and the idea of change is a far sight, but not necessarily an impossible one either – perhaps we will always have sexist views and our language will continue to be built upon Reflectionism or perhaps our language will change and Determinism will influence a new era of language that considers far more equality.

By Ben Franks


Note: You are not logged in, but you can still leave a comment or review. Before it shows up, a moderator will need to approve your comment (this is only a safeguard against spambots). Leave your email if you would like to be notified when your message is approved.







Is this a review?


  

Comments



User avatar
21 Reviews


Points: 61
Reviews: 21

Donate
Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:39 am
MrTalljoker wrote a review...



Dear BenFranks,
You know when I saw this, I instantly thought of that one scene from Spike Lee's "Malcolm X". It's the scene where Malcolm is being shown a dictionary and showing how the white man's words were inherently racist because black was another word for evil and white was another word for good. I've herd this argument used in a few other ways, including this essay, and I just view it as both an over analysis and an over dose of political correctness.

I see that you make two points through this essay, one I agree with, one I don't. The one I agree with is the comparison of words similar to "slut" and "player", I agree with this, if a woman or man wants to have sex with a whole bunch of people, nether should be negatively viewed by anyone. Thankfully the word "slut" is starting to develop like the word "faggot" did with the LGBT community, it's slowly becoming a proud proclamation, rather than an insulting slur.

The main point you bring up is the use of the word "man". It's an argument that seems to be old as time to me, "If you're not sexist, then why do you say 'mankind' instead of 'men & woman' or 'humans'?" According the the definition in the Merriam-Webster dictionary, man is: "A human being of either sex; a person." It's a common suffix we put at the end of many words. HuMAN, MANkind, even woMAN. But let's look at an example of someone using these words, take Neil Armstrong's famous quote "One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.". Was that quote sexist? Did Neil say that and mean to snuff out woman, was he just talking about males? The obvious answer is, no. Neil was talking about everyone of every sex and everyone understood that. But if someone thinks that is sexist, why not go further? Why not say person is sexist? Because it has the suffix of 'son' in it and that refers to a male child.

Really my point is this: Should we be so obsessed in not offending or demeaning anyone, that we contort into this very tight linguistic ball to potentially avoid that? Is a person's language truly sexist if that person views both genders as equals? Honestly, how I see it, no, no I don't think that. I think it's just over analyzing.

Now that I have my opinion out of the way, I wanted to bring up two things that I noticed while reading. One, take out the "In this short essay, I will describe exactly why it is I have come to this conclusion." part. We understand that's what this is, you don't need to clarify that this is an essay that will express your point. You had a strong paragraph, but that just bombed it.

Second, is that you don't bring up any data or quotes through this whole thing. It's just you pointing to things and saying "this is clearly sexist". You do, thankfully, express why you think this well, for some of them. But it could have been stronger if you brought up a social experiment showing this, or a quote from someone well versed in studying linguistics. Someone like Noam Chomsky, Ferdinand de Saussure, or someone along those lines, I think it could help strengthen your argument.

Overall, while I may disagree with your opinion, I respect it and I found it interesting to play with the idea in my head. I look forward to doing this again with another one of your works soon.

Sincerely,
MrTalljoker




User avatar
16 Reviews


Points: 273
Reviews: 16

Donate
Tue May 13, 2014 9:40 pm
TrudiRose wrote a review...



Hey there - great article, as a language student at University I found it particularly interesting. I'm not going to debate the content of your article mainly because it is well written and it is evident that you have done a lot of research/work before publishing it.
What I did want to debate (or at least just bring up) is something that Jenthura mentions below and I was thinking the exact same thing as I was reading: is it the language that's sexist or the attitudes of the users of the language. Personally I think words like player and slut are a result of social attitudes rather than the actual English language. Yes the words exist but I think that their usage depends on the type of people using these terms.
The words themselves are arguably not sexist - a slut is a slut, a player is a player it's the way these words are interpreted in modern society and why the more derogatory words are used in describing the negative actions of women...
Not bashing your argument at all though! I really enjoyed it and it got me thinking which is always fun! ;)
Keep up the good work! :)




User avatar
411 Reviews


Points: 42428
Reviews: 411

Donate
Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:43 pm
BenFranks says...



I'm glad you enjoyed it. :)




User avatar
50 Reviews


Points: 1360
Reviews: 50

Donate
Tue Feb 15, 2011 9:11 pm
Angela wrote a review...



I don't read very many nonfiction things, but this was an essay I really enjoyed reading. I live over across the ocean in America, and things are the same over here. Definitely on my nerves, and has been for some time. Thanks very much for putting the injustice of these connotations into words. I enjoyed reading this, and hope to find more essays by you in the future.




User avatar
411 Reviews


Points: 42428
Reviews: 411

Donate
Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:48 pm
BenFranks says...



Shia225 wrote:I think this was a good essay, but you missed a big one. 'Mankind' or 'man-made' is also symbolizing it. Plus, on 'How Its Made', a T.V. show on the science channel, always says, "he then blah blah blah." Never 'she'; they use they when women make it. But that makes sense, your essay, and I realized how true it was.


Yes, I realise some major sexist points are missed out, but I only started English Language 2 weeks ago, so inevitably, I wouldn't have covered everything.




User avatar
53 Reviews


Points: 974
Reviews: 53

Donate
Wed Sep 29, 2010 9:21 pm
BrooklynWriter says...



I don't kow about the English languace is but the Spanish language is.




User avatar
6 Reviews


Points: 1076
Reviews: 6

Donate
Wed Sep 29, 2010 9:02 pm
Shia225 wrote a review...



I think this was a good essay, but you missed a big one. 'Mankind' or 'man-made' is also symbolizing it. Plus, on 'How Its Made', a T.V. show on the science channel, always says, "he then blah blah blah." Never 'she'; they use they when women make it. But that makes sense, your essay, and I realized how true it was.




User avatar
816 Reviews


Points: 8413
Reviews: 816

Donate
Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:36 pm
Leja wrote a review...



Even though the following are criticisms, I do think that you made a good argument overall =)

This essay apologizes too much for itself. If you're going to make a point like this, really go for it! For example: "potentially sexist generalisations". Conversely, "...numberous ways our language... are clearly sexist" is a good, solid stance. (Make sure your verbs agree in number, though).

As well as Lexical Asymmetry there are other things that suggest more clearly that the English language and our connotations of it is sexist. Like Marked and unmarked terms for example, most of which are derived from such traditional usages that we do not think of them as sexist, when really, to a certain extent, they are.


^^ Watch out for sentence construction (the first sentencec is fine; the second is a fragment) here, and elsewhere in your argument.

Maybe this is just my personal pet peeve, but I don't think that societal generalizations belong in essays. That is to say, all the "we tend to think..."; "society labels this as..." This is especially relevant for your essay because there's a line in the first paragraph "Therefore we rarely tend to question it" that's jarring because the point is to question language.

Similarly, I think you could make your conclusion stronger by replacing generalizations with solid facts (everything in bold is where I ask "how did/would this happen?"):

However, I believe that this is because it has been influenced over many years by our literature, traditional views and age-old terms, built upon a mix of Determinism and Reflectionism to create what we now see as our modern language; these connotations are passed on from generation to generation and the idea of change is a far sight, but not necessarily an impossible one either – perhaps we will always have sexist views and our language will continue to be built upon Reflectionism or perhaps our language will change and Determinism will influence a new era of language that considers far more equality.




User avatar
411 Reviews


Points: 42428
Reviews: 411

Donate
Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:43 pm
BenFranks says...



I see what you mean. Post it in the discussions section too to see what others think but here's some of the reasons why it's a sexist language:

-> Referring to a whole species as "Man" is sexist, blatantly, regardless of connotation.
-> Most "sexist" terms are only sexist because of our connotations of them or our shared ideologies, so you're right in some senses, but also, don't forget people are influenced by the language itself too and brought up around it.
-> Marked terms are sexist to a pre-feminist point of view because they are suggesting extensions of male subjects. Whether you see the connotations as offending or not, it is still sexist in favour of males.




User avatar
350 Reviews


Points: 13307
Reviews: 350

Donate
Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:30 pm
Jenthura wrote a review...



Hmm, I don't want to do a big review and all, just one question: What if the language itself isn't sexist, what if the people are?
Also, another people question: Does nationality play a role? How about a regional personality*? I'm quite certain that the words 'slut' and 'player' are not common words at all in places where English is a second language. (I live in such a place, I know)

*By that vague term, I mean a personality trait or traits that is common for a large amount of people. Correct me if I'm wrong XD.

EDIT: I just read what Solvalery wrote and realized that what she said followed my thoughts closely. This is true of my native language as well, where we drop a lot of words the English language has. (Words like 'the' and 'it' and all references to verb tenses), still there's no sign of sexism in our language, so maybe you need to rethink your essay. People VS Language? :smt003

EDIT V.2: Drat, I also realized that I shouldn't have posted my comment here.




User avatar
411 Reviews


Points: 42428
Reviews: 411

Donate
Tue Sep 28, 2010 7:58 pm
BenFranks says...



Thank you for your comments :)




User avatar
532 Reviews


Points: 1271
Reviews: 532

Donate
Tue Sep 28, 2010 7:57 pm
GeeLyria wrote a review...



Hi Ben! WOW! This is something I have been thinking lately, because my native language is Spanish! And I noticed in English, stuff (like book, computer, table and whatever) do NOT have gender, they are just "it"! So this was REALLY interesting! Thanks for posting this! *Sol clicks like*
Bye




User avatar
33 Reviews


Points: 4708
Reviews: 33

Donate
Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:41 pm
kidashka wrote a review...



Firstly, I love you for writing this because (as a female who has studied this in great detail!) I am totally in agreemenet with you!!!!

Feedback
-Very sound reasoning and good use of explanations for a non-specialist audience. (Perhaps more specialised words could be used, you seem to be playing it quite safe here.)

-I think perhaps you should switch the second and thrid paragraphs, but tack the first line of the (currently) second paragraph onto what is now the third paragraph. (Hope that makes sense!) The idea of 'man is norm' fits better with marked vs. unmarked.

-The bit about determinism vs. reflectionism goes off on a bit of a tangent and doesn't seem to strengthen your arguement very much. Maybe skim over it more.

-Try to use the word 'I' less as it's making your essay sound too subjective. The third person appears more factual and objective; therefore it can be more persuasive in writing.

Further Points you could add
- 'male as norm' paragraph - how the human race is referred to as 'man' ; use of generic 'he'

-You could also add a bit about semantic derogation vs. semantic amelioration (which is super interesting! This is how meanings of words change - why does "cleaning LADY" make sense whilst "cleaning LORD" sounds absurd?) This could link with the other para about semantics if you wanted to fit it in somewhere.

-possibly talk about recent changes to language - attempts to "degenderise" words eg. police OFFICER vs. policeMAN(but is this this only in England?!)

-Maybe you need a counter argument. You argue this side very well but need to show an understanding of other opinions.


Overall this is very good!!!

Hopefully my review helps you - PM me if you make any changes cause I happen to find this topic utterly FASCINATING :D




User avatar
411 Reviews


Points: 42428
Reviews: 411

Donate
Tue Sep 28, 2010 3:18 pm
BenFranks says...



Yes, I am male. Don't worry :).
That is true, but can a male not campaign against sexism? It seems a wee uncommon, but all the same, this was for an English Language lesson, so it's more that I had to do it.




User avatar
16 Reviews


Points: 2338
Reviews: 16

Donate
Mon Sep 27, 2010 10:35 pm
aslan_radish24 wrote a review...



This is very good. I am going to assume, as one never should, that Ben stands for Benjamin or another male name, not Benny or a female name, and say that the most interesting part of this essay Is that a male person wrote it. (unless, of course, ben franks is the name of a character or just a signature, and is not the writer's real name at all) that is really all I have to say.




User avatar
411 Reviews


Points: 42428
Reviews: 411

Donate
Mon Sep 27, 2010 9:44 pm
BenFranks says...



Thanks Charlie ever so much for taking the time to review this in-depth for me. It'll all help me along with my A-levels, so any thoughts on the writing of essays is priceless. So thanks again.




User avatar
166 Reviews


Points: 10240
Reviews: 166

Donate
Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:21 pm
Charlie II wrote a review...



An interesting question, and an equally interesting essay. You clearly know your facts and terminology, your argument flows logically, and your essay form is good as well. I do have a few points to make, though. Three, actually.

1. The Argument
Generally well-constructed and thought-through. I would, however, like to make comments on how it engaged me as I read it through.

The Opening:
You make your conclusion known here, which is very good. It's nice to see that your essay is written to argue a point, as opposed to blunder around until it reaches one. Unfortunately, you do suffer from the classic "And heeeere's my essay!" sentence:

In this short essay, I will describe exactly why it is I have come to this conclusion.

It acts as a fanfare, like a signpost pointing to the rest of the essay. It's not necessary. The reader will naturally read on; they don't need directions.

First Paragraph:
I'm in two minds on this one. Part of me thinks that the points you are making are more sociological than language orientated. I'm not sure whether it specifically answers the question: "Is the English language sexist?". The first two sentences hit the topic perfectly, but it seems the bulk of the paragraph is focused on our society's perception of men and women.

I understand that this is required in order for you to talk about "Reflectionism" and "Determinism". But, in my eyes, this this dealing with the question "Are words themselves sexist?" rather than "Is the English language sexist?". I worry that the first paragraph of the argument is muddied by a point that may or may not be on topic. Perhaps you could reword it to make your point clearer and more focused on the actual question?

(I realise this is a bit of a grey area, and that as an outsider it will be harder for me to understand the argument. If it is something you have been taught for the essay, please disregard my confusion. I'm easily confused. ;))

Second Paragraph
:
Lots of good points, and much more cogent argument. It feels like you've really got into the essay now. I especially like:
In comparison with words such as ‘kitchenette’ the connotation of these marked terms is that the female’s term is associated with being smaller or less important than a male’s term.

That's a fantastic point which I'd never considered before. It does, however, seem to leap into the argument as a bit of a tangent... (Almost as if you thought of it because you'd just written "usherette" and it reminded you of "kitchenette"). Personally, I think it deserves its own paragraph! You have a very good point there, and it is ENTIRELY focused on the question of the essay. Make more of it!

Third Paragraph:
More good points. Even better than the second paragraph, really. I totally agree with the "male nurse" one, though I am a little less convinced by the "lady doctor" one. It seems a bit dated now, and I honestly believe that public opinion has become more open to women who study medicine. They're just pure, simple, generic "doctors". Really, that's a "content and opinion" comment, but it is worth considering.

Fourth Paragraph:
Essentially the same points as Paragraph Three, but developed differently. Good essay writing here.

Conclusion:
Cue the corresponding fanfare for the end of the essay:
So, when I ask myself if the English language is sexist, I have come to the conclusion that it is.

This is just the same as the one I pointed out in the introduction. It's the last paragraph; it's obviously the conclusion, so don't worry about signposting this one too. Instead, consider making it obvious in your writing that it is the end, and avoid the pointless "announcement" sentence. It's more professional that way.

As for the conclusion itself, you do actually make a decision. So many essays end with the numbing inevitable "sitting-on-the-fence" conclusion where they don't actually choose a side, but yours is better than that. You do, however, move on to say you're not sure about the future, which is an interesting point to make. Probably because no-one is sure about it. That's kind of the point. ;) I feel that it comes across a little weak at the end, which is a shame because you actually wrote a decisive argument!

Perhaps you could invert the last paragraph and move the speculation to the begining of the conclusion, and end decisively? It's personal choice, again, so see how you feel about it.


2. Clutter
The first thing that strikes me, from a stylistic viewpoint, is that you use a lot of words. I'm guilty of it too. Sometimes. ;) And, unfortunately for us, the clearest way to write is by removing the clutter. There are lots of words that just aren't necessary in this paragraph, and with a bit of pruning you will find something a little more elegant, engaging, and tasteful than before.

Before:
"This question, at first glance, bears an assumed answer of ‘no’ to a general audience of people who have used and breathed the language for most of their lives."

After:
"Most English speaking people would answer "no" to this question."

Has anything been lost in translation, here? I don't think so. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a little rewording hasn't actually altered the meaning of the sentence. It's just clearer and more succinct.

Before:
This question#FF0000 ">, at first glance, bears an assumed answer of ‘no’ to a general audience#FF0000 "> of people (... as opposed to an audience of koalas? ...) who have #FF0000 ">used and breathed (... isn't it "lived and breathed", as collocations go? ...) the language for #FF0000 ">most of their lives. However, this is #FF0000 ">mainly due to the #FF0000 ">very (... how can a fact be "very"? ...) fact that we#FF0000 "> simply haven’t noticed it. We’re ignorant to whether or not it is because the#FF0000 "> sole traditional values and sexist views has#FF0000 ">, essentially, shaped the way we think#FF0000 "> as people (... again, as opposed to "as koalas"? ...) and also how we have been brought up. Therefore we rarely #FF0000 ">tend to question it. Sure enough though, our minds soon change when we’re #FF0000 ">opened up to (... seems a long way of saying "given" or "shown" ...) example and reference of numerous ways our language – or at least the connotations #FF0000 ">we hold with it – are clearly sexist. #FF0000 ">In this short essay, I will describe exactly why it is I have come to this conclusion.


After:
Most English speaking people would answer "no" to this question. However, this is due to the fact that we haven’t noticed it. We’re ignorant to whether or not it is the traditional values and sexist views that have, shaped the way we think. We're also inherently ignorant to how we have been brought up: we rarely question it. Sure enough though, our minds soon change when we’re shown examples and references of the ways our language – or at least its connotations – are clearly sexist.


#FF0000 ">Red text is where I think something is unnecessary, or unnecessarily long winded.
Bold text is where I've inserted something. None of it is my own material, I've just reworded you. ;)

The new "slim-line" introduction runs smoothly straight into your first point. You don't need to announce that, because the whole paragraph implies that you're going to explain "why". Consider this approach with the rest of your essay. In non-fiction writing, and essay writing in particular, less is more. Live by it. ;)


3. Clarity

(I think, in this monster of a review, that I've already covered some of this under "Clutter". Please excuse me if I repeat myself!)

To be honest, this really isn't much of a problem for you. You write well, and in the main you do write clearly. But there are, I feel, enough occasions of this for it to warrant your attention. Sometimes, it is unclear what you are trying to say:
our perceived society

Really? The society that we perceive? So it doesn't actually exist? I'm not quite sure that's what you mean. I believe you were actually talking about the perceptions that our society has. They're different things, and it's confusing to have to work that out whilst reading the essay. If you can make it as clear as possible when you write it, the reader will have a much easier time and enjoy your essay more.

However, this is #FF0000 ">mainly due to the #FF0000 ">very fact that we #FF0000 ">simply haven’t noticed it.

This is linked to the clutter, and so probably repetitive, but do you see how the extra words make the meaning of the sentence unclear? This is a special case of clutter, because each word that I have highlighted in red is a bump in the road. If you remove them, the sentence still goes in the same direction. If you leave them in, the sentence is longer and harder to decipher because of the unnecessary qualifiers. Do you see what I mean?

Clarity will improve with brevity. And brevity will improve as you remove clutter. If you work on that, then it should all come together. ;)


Conclusion
I really am sorry for the essay on your essay! Hopefully some of this critique will be of use to you. Clearly you understand the foundations of writing: you write with a sense of voice, with precise grammar, and you are very articulate too. In fact, the reason I can give a decent criticism of your work is because it's already so good! So, don't be hurt or insulted; this essay has real potential. And (without sounding condescending) as a writer you have even more.

Please don't hesitate to PM me if you want me to clarify anything, or even just to argue with me. I hope this review was helpful, and I hope you can use it to improve.

Charlie





I know history. There are many names in history, but none of them are ours.
— Richard Siken