Discussion in 'Polski (Polish)' started by meglila, May 29, 2010.
as equivalent to a housewife - house hen? home hen?
It's "housewife". However, I don't think it carries pejorative associations like it does in Polish.
what I am looking for is actually this pejorative meaning. May be it just doesn't exist in English?
Housewife does carry a pejorative meaning. Homemaker is a neutral term.
so may be it exists in jargon?
"Housewife" does not really carry pejorative meaning on its own, and I cannot think of anything in English that is more pejorative. Many housewives have no problem referring to themselves that way. Usually if you want to make it sound offensive, you add some inflection to it. I.e. "Stay-at-home housewife" isn't pejorative either, but you can guarantee that someone reading/hearing this will find it pejorative since it emphasizes it.
EDIT: However "Housewife" will be received as an insult depending on the culture of the receiver. In the UK women prefer to be career-driven, and so being a housewife carries unmistakable social stigma (but not linguistically). I have *heard* that being a housewife is more common in the U.S.
IMHO "kura domowa" is colloquial but not necessarily offensive.
Like ><FISH'> noted, some women may feel offended by that term, but it's a matter of self-perspective
One has to agree that it's a matter of self-perspective but I can bet that in Poland at least 7 out of 10 women won't like being referred to themselves as kura domowa.
Anyway, I also started a thread on the same issue in the English Only forum.
Make some research then, and ask 10 women if they would like to be called "kura domowa".
wait for my results ;]
I would not
Hm, maybe I could call myself "kura domowa" only as a joke, ironically - like Maria Peszek in "Rosół" http://www.teksty.org/Maria_Peszek,Rosół- but I am afraid that if man wants to use kura domowa to describe any woman, he should always be prepared for a possible punch
Not necessarily. Becoming a "kura domowa" is the greatest dream of one girl who was with me at high school class. Anyway, I know some more such girls. But it might be just a proof that my closest entourage keeps traditional and undegenerated values. Personally, I have nothing against it.
Well, we are talking about calling someone "kura domowa", not about values (ok, maybe about speaker's attitude to women refered this name).
The fact that women find it offensive does not mean that they don't care about cleanliness of their flats or don't want to take care about their families, come on! The problem is about attitude with is represented by the name "kura domowa" - it is humiliating and suggests inferiority of woman, who is -by this name - compared to some kind of well-equipped all-in-one machine.
Sorry for my mistakes, I am learning - constatly
My post was also referring to calling. I wanted to indicate that my schoolmate would surely not feel offended being called so.
The term 'kura domowa' has had the connotation: 'a woman comitted only to the tasks at home - housekeeping, cooking, children, not interested in anything outside the home'. I would presume that today's women would not like to be assosiated with such (lack of) ambitions. The word itself may be a little obsolete, and the meaning not quite clear for the younger generation.
Housekeeping and raising children is lack of ambitions? What's this world coming to?
Just another stereotype, no need to worry too much about it. I've been called "kura domowa" a few times lately and never had any problem with it. Not sure how it would feel if I were a woman though.
I agree with majlo's opinion. Raising children is probably the most ambitious task of mankind and these who are in charge of it are particularly women - for children's good. And this is why we should honour and bow our heads to them.
So does that mean that women who can manage education/work as well as raising children are either superhuman or negligent?
It's always this for that. You can't be with your kids all the time they need you and make a carrer at the same moment. And it does not matter what sex you are really.
Small children have to have their object (e.g. mother) around to develop as they should. Leaving them in a creche is always a necessity, but it doesn't help.
Who is to say that having a parent around all the time helps children develop as they should? Many children do develop just fine without constant supervision. I do not see the necessity for full-time care for children beyond a certain age. It can even be argued that too much guidance and supervision forces children to be weak and lacking in independence. They may be children, but they do have to become adults some day. Being clingy and growing up with an unrealistic sense of stability doesn't help prepare them for their lives.
Margaret Maher is the one, John Bowlby is another and most of the therapists in the world who deal today with adults who lacked their parents around them will support that view.
To make it clear: I meant really small children, infants and toddlers, as I referred mostly to my own situation at the moment. I agree with you as for older kids. And that "certain age" would be around 1 year, I guess.
Also, what you call here the "unrealistic sense of stability" is viewed completly different by children, for which it is a necessary base to be secure enough to explore the external world.
I've opened this discussion because on my faculty we've read a book entitled "Housewife" and then we've discussed to know how it looks around in different countries. I consider myself as a housewife - "a domestic hen", 'cause I' m taking care of my house, children and have no job outside my house, actually. I want to spend a maximum of the time with mines.
And I assume it completely.
Erm, Meglila... I have to admit it's a bid odd to see you contribute to this thread again after two and a half years What prompted you to do so? It's been quite a while
Separate names with a comma.