Stubborn

Stubborn (pronounced stuhb-ern)

(1) Unreasonably obstinate; obstinately unmoving.

(2) Fixed or set in purpose or opinion; resolute; obstinately maintaining a course of action regardless of circumstances.

(3) Something difficult to manage or suppress.

(4) An object which is hard, tough, or stiff (stone, timber etc) or wood and thus difficult to shape or work; an object such (as a tightly fastened bolt) which is difficult to move; any problems which prove resistant to attempts to secure a solution.

(5) In the slang of the citrus industry, as stubbornness, a disease of citrus trees characterized by stunted growth and misshapen fruit, caused by Spiroplasma citri.

1350–1400: From the Middle English stiborn, stiborne, styborne, stuborn & stoborne, of obscure origin; the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) noting the earliest known form as stiborn.  Stubborn is an adjective, stubbornly an adverb and stubbornness a noun.

Stubborn is one of a remarkably large number of words in English with an unknown origin and is thus self referential, itself unreasonably obstinate in an unwillingness to disclose its source.  Deconstruction (stub + born) is no help because the spelling seems to have evolved merely to respect the pronunciation (something which in English can’t always be relied upon) and however tempting might seem a link with “stub” (a short, projecting part or remaining piece) (from the Middle English stubbe (tree stump), from the Old English stybb, stobb & stubb (tree stump), from the Proto-West Germanic stubb, from the Proto-Germanic stunjaz& stubbaz and related to the Middle Dutch stubbe, the Old Norse stubbr and the Faroese stubbi (stub), from the primitive Indo-European steu (to push, stick, knock, beat) & stew- (sharp slope)), a thing often immovable and unyielding, there’s simply no evidence.

More correctly, there’s simply no verified evidence.  As modern English coalesced during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, lexicography became more industry than art and there was great interest (and competition) in the production of dictionaries, some of which included etymological detail in their entries.  At this time, it was thought the origin of stubborn was known, the accepted method of the time being to look for similar constructions in Hebrew, Latin and Greek on the basis it was supposedly from these ancient tongues that the words of modern languages were derived.  That supposition wasn’t entirely accurate but was true enough for many of the words in English at the time fully to be understood.  Because the Greek adjective στι-βαρóς (obstinate, stubborn) enjoyed such a similarity of sound with stubborn, that was thought conclusive, hence the entries in early dictionaries.  However, later scholarship proved the two words unrelated and no research has ever offered a plausible alternative.

According to the manufacturers of detergents, the most recalcitrant stains are "stubborn stains".

That stubbornness is a frequently encountered part of the human condition is perhaps indicated by the numbers of words and phrases (most famously “stubborn as a mule”) in English associated with the idea including adamant, determined, dogged, headstrong, inflexible, intractable, ornery, persistent, perverse, relentless, rigid, single-minded, steadfast, tenacious, tough, unshakable, willful, balky, bloody-minded, bullheaded, contrary, refractory, unyielding, obdurate, wayward, obstinate, disobedient, insubordinate, undisciplined & rebellious.

In the interview which accompanied her 2011 Playboy photo-shoot (and Playboy once commissioned research to prove people really did read the text), Lindsay Lohan admitted she “…should have listened to her advisers” and had she done so she would likely have avoided the “problems” so well documented by the tabloid press.  “My stubbornness at 18 and 19-years old got in the way” she added, acknowledging that “…ultimately we are responsible for ourselves and our own actions.”  She returned to the theme in a Vogue interview in 2022 discussing her roles in The Parent Trap (1998) revealing one consequence of her stubbornness complicated things for the production crew.  Her (clearly non-negotiable) demand was that she had to wear a certain nail polish while playing the part of one of the identical twins and that was “Hard Candy” in blue.  Ms Lohan said at the time it was “a big deal” and when it comes to fashion, pre-teen girls are an opinionated and uncompromising lot.  It was of course not a good idea because, with the one actor playing both twins, the distinctive enamel had to be removed with each switch of character.  “It was a nightmare for everyone” she admitted.

In use, stubborn, dogged, obstinate & persistent imply some fixity of purpose or condition and resistance to change, regardless of changing circumstances or compelling evidence.  There are however nuances, stubborn and obstinate both imply resistance to advice or force but stubborn is more suggestive of an innate quality and is used almost exclusively when referring to inanimate things; by convention, to be obstinate seems to demand there be some process of thought or at least character (mules presumably difficult in nature rather than in any way thoughtful).  One who is dogged might be both obstinate and stubborn but dogged can also imply tenacity, a pertinacity and grimness of purpose in doing something, especially in the face of difficulties which seem insurmountable and one who persists in seeking to solve an apparently insoluble problem can be lauded for their, dogged, stubborn determination.  Persistent implies having a resoluteness of purpose, one who perseveres despite setbacks and discouragement.  Some insist stubborn describes an extreme degree of passive obstinacy and while that tends to be true when the word is used of objects, among the sentient, stubbornness can manifest as anything but passive.

In the Bible there are passages which suggest stubbornness in the doing of God's work is a virtue but the trait was sometimes clearly a sin.  In the Book of Deuteronomy (21:18-21 as part of the Deuteronomic Code), the penalty of death by stoning is specified as a punishment for a stubborn and delinquent son.  The text is an interesting example of the usefulness of the Bible as a historic document, the inclusion in the Deuteronomic Code an attempt to reform the breakdown in family life characteristic of an era in which the absolute power parents had once exercised over their children had dissipated, hence the notion that the authority of a village's elders must be both invoked and exercised.  As a solution (though perhaps without the executions), it sounds like many modern suggestions to solve the problem of youth crime and juvenile delinquency.  

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (King James Version (KJV 1611))

18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:

19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;

20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.

21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

The 1967 Oldsmobile Delmont 88 (it's an myth spread by Gore Vidal (1925–2012) that the Kennedys drove only Buicks) driven by Senator Ted Kennedy (1932-2009) in which Mary Jo Kopechne (1940-1969) died.  The accident happened at close to midnight, the pair having left a party on Chappaquiddick Island, off the east coast of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts. Kennedy survived, having left the scene of the crash in circumstances never satisfactorily explained.  The car in which he left the young lady to die belonged to his mother.  By the the time of the accident, Oldsmobile had ceased to use the Delmont name which was offered only in the 1967 & 1968 model years. 

As recent events and judicial decisions illustrate, in the United States there is a tension created by the dynamics which existed from the first days of white settlement, the competing lust to live free from oppression versus the undercurrent of a muscular, puritanical religiosity.  The Old Testament force of the latter in November 1646 prevailed upon the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, inspiring a law providing, inter alia, for the capital punishment of male children found disobedient to their parents.  Although the death penalty was later removed (though punishment for recalcitrant daughters was added in an early example of gender equality), the law was not repealed until 1973 although, as the troubled life of Massachusetts senator Ted Kennedy might suggest, enforcement had by then long fallen into disuse.  Similar laws were enacted in Connecticut in 1650, Rhode Island in 1688, and New Hampshire in 1679.

The Massachusetts statute: "If a man have a stubborn or rebellious son, of sufficient years and understanding sixteen years of age, which will not obey the voice of his Father, or the voice of his Mother, and that when they have chastened him will not harken unto them: then shall his Father and Mother being his natural parents, lay hold on him, and bring him to the Magistrates assembled in Court and testify unto them, that their son is stubborn and rebellious and will not obey their voice and chastisement, but lives in sundry notorious crimes, such a son shall be put to death."

King Manuel II (standing, third from left) in May 1910, European royalty gathered in London for the funeral of Edward VII and among the mourners were nine reigning sovereigns, the image colorized from a sepia-toned original.  Dom Manuel II ("The Unfortunate" 1889–1932) reigned as the last King of Portugal and the Algarve 1908-1910, his brief tenure occasioned by the Lisbon regicide of 1908 in which his father and elder brother were murdered.

Counter-intuitively, considering the blood-soaked histories of Europe’s squabbling dynasties, of all the hundreds of cognomina (names appended before or after the person's name which are applied to identify their nature) attached to kings and princes, it seems only to have been Louis X of France (1289–1316; King of France 1314-1316 & King of Navarre (as Louis I) 1305-1316) who was informally styled "The Stubborn" (Louis le Hutin), although, just to stress the point, he was known also as "Louis the Quarrelsome" & "Louis the Headstrong".  Because in royalty names are so often recycled (John, Frederick, Louis, Charles etc), cognomina are genuinely helpful to historians and are for readers, probably more mnemonic that Roman numbering (Louis XI, XII, XIII etc).  While there has been much use of the usual suspects (the Brave, Great, Good, Bad, Cruel, Victorious etc) and some have been merely descriptive (the Fat, Bald, Tall, Hairy etc (although some of these were ironic)), some were evocative:

There was the Abandoned (John I of Aragon), the Accursed (Sviatopolk I of Kiev), the Affable (Charles VIII of France), the Alchemist (John, Margrave of Brandenburg-Kulmbach), the Apostate (Julian, Emperor of Rome, the Arab (Phillip I, Emperor of Rome), the Astrologer (Alfonso X of Castile), the Bad (applied to many but famously associated with Emund of Sweden), the Bastard (of which there have been many more than those to whom the sobriquet was attached, the best known being William I (better known as the Conqueror)), the Beer Jug (John George I, Elector of Saxony), the Bewitched (Charles II of Spain), the Bloodaxe (Eric I of Norway), the Bloodthirsty (doubtless a widely used adjective but the most cited seems Ismail of Morocco), Bloody (Mary I of England (and the well known Vodka cocktail)), the Cabbage (Ivaylo of Bulgaria), the Crosseyed (Vasili Kosoi, a Muscovian usurper), the Devil (Robert I, Duke of Normandy), the Indolent (Louis V of France (also the Sluggard which in this context imparts much the same meaning)), the Drunkard, (Michael III, Byzantine Emperor although one suspects he was one of many), the Dung-Named (Constantine V, Byzantine Emperor), the Executioner (Mehmed I of the Ottoman Empire, again one of many), the Fat (most associated with Charles III, Holy Roman Emperor), the Fowler (Henry I of Germany, a notable figure of the First Reich), the Hairy (Wilfred I of Urgel), the Impaler (the infamous Vlad III of Wallachia (Basarab Ţepeluş cel Tânăr of Wallachia was the Little Impaler)), the Impotent (Henry IV of Castile), the Mad (of which there should have been more than there are and associated (fairly or not) with Lorenzo de' Medici of the Florentine Republic), Minus-a-Quarter (Michael VII Dukas, Byzantine Emperor (and apparently the only regal sobriquet derived from monetary policy)), the Priest Hater (Eric II of Norway), the She-Wolf (Isabella of France), the Be-shitten (James II (of England and Ireland and James VII of Scotland)), the Stammerer (Louis II of France), the Terrible (a popular one but best remembered for Ivan IV of Russia), the Unfortunate (which could fairly be applied to many but seems linked only with Manuel II of Portugal and the Algarve (who was unfortunate (o Desaventurado) but it could have been worse (he survived to see out his years in Twickenham) and he was known also as the Patriot (o Patriota)).

Athenaeum

Athenaeum (pronounced ath-uh-nee-uhm or ath-uh-ney-uhn)

(1) An institution for the promotion of literary or scientific learning.

(2) A library or reading room.

(3) A sanctuary of Athena at Athens, built by the Roman emperor Hadrian, and frequented by poets and scholars (always with initial capital letter).

1727:  Adopted in English from the Latinized form of Greek Athḗnaion (the temple of Athene) in ancient Athens, in which professors taught and actors or poets rehearsed. The meaning "literary club-room or reading room" is from 1799 while the generalized "literary or scientific club" emerged in the mid 1860s.  The academy of learning in Rome was established near the Forum in circa 135 AD by the Emperor Hadrian.  The alternative (mostly US) spelling is athenaeum.

Ruins of the Athenaeum, Rome, now a working archaeological dig.

The Emperor Hadrian (Publius Aelius Hadrianus, 76–138; Roman emperor 117-138) built the Athenaeum as a place for the promotion of literary and scientific studies (ingenuarum artium), the name borrowed from the Hellenic original in acknowledgement of the still admired intellectual traditions of classical Athens.  The Athenaeum was situated near the Capitoline Hill and the ruins were discovered in 2009 during excavations for the construction of a underground rail line, in the middle of what is now Piazza Venezia.

Founded in 1824 with an exclusively male membership roll, the Athenaeum is a private club in London, on Pall Mall at the corner of Waterloo Place, the origin of which was to provide a place men of a literary and scientific bent would find convivial, an atmosphere then apparently thought hard to find in the city's more fashionable clubs.  As was the trend in the twentieth century, women sort of "crept in" as guests and later in a segregated space but since 2002 they have been admitted as full members.  In another sign of the time, it’s now a non-smoking building although charmingly, the elegant “smoking room” signs remain.  There are a number of Athenaeum Clubs in cities of the Commonwealth.

South Library, The Athenaeum Club, London.

The Athenaeum Club is noted for its three libraries, housing a collection of manuscripts, documents and books accumulated over two centuries.  The most photogenic of the three is the South Library designed by English architect Decimus Burton (1800–1881).  Although a space in the tradition of the great continental libraries, in one aspect the visual effect has been heightened in the twenty-first century, LED (light emitting diode) illumination now integrated, almost imperceptibly, into the architectural fabric.  In a nod to the layout of a library's shelving, London’s DesignPlusLights created a three-level, horizontal framework, softly to illuminate the spines, cowls added over each light source to ensure there was no leakage of luminosity, only the vertical shelving being lit.  Adding to the ethereal effect, taking advantage of the new possibilities offered by the tiny LED units, miniature spotlights were built-into the central chandelier to upwardly project light to the ceiling rose.  There’s also a trick using light as an architectural device, recessed up-lights within the window frames and fireplace drawing the eye lower, rendering the internal void something more attuned to human scale.

Dimple

Dimple (pronounced dim-puhl)

(1) A small (permanent or transient) natural indentation in the chin, cheek, or sacral region, probably due to some developmental fault in the subcutaneous connective tissue or in underlying bone (but can manifest as a result of trauma or the contraction of scar tissue).

(2) Any similar slight depression.

(3) To mark with or as if with dimples; to produce dimples in.

(4) In metalworking, to dent a metal sheet so as to permit use of bolts or rivets with countersunk heads; to mark a metal object with a drill point as a guide for further drilling.

(5) In glassmaking, a bubble or dent in glass.

1350-1400: From the Middle English dimple & dympull (natural transient small dent in some soft part of the human body) from the Old English dympel & dyppan (a dip, a hollow in the trail or road), probably from the Proto-Germanic dumpila- (sink-hole), probably related to the Proto-Germanic dumpilaz & dumpa- (hole, hollow, pit), from the primitive Indo-European dhewb- (deep, hollow), a construct of the dialectal dump (deep hole or pool) +‎ -le (the diminutive suffix).  It was akin to the Old High German tumphilo (pool) from whence German gained Tümpel (pool), the Middle Low German dümpelen and the Dutch dompelen (to plunge).

The noun was the original form, describing a small dent in some part of a person's surface soft tissue (skin), applied especially to that produced in the cheek of a young person by the act of smiling and was always associated with youthful attractiveness rather than being some sort of flaw although it was all based on the less attractive "pothole", hence the link with words of Germanic origin which tend to this meaning.  From the Proto-Germanic dumpilaz also came other forms meaning "small pit, little pool" including the German Tümpel (pool), the Middle Low German dümpelen and the Dutch dompelen (to plunge).  The verb dates from the 1570s (implied in dimpled), as the intransitive, "form dimples", derived from the noun and the transitive sense "mark with dimples" emerged circa 1600.

Use as a proper noun actually pre-dates the descriptor of the physical characteristic, Dimple as a place name noted circa 1200 and as a surname from the late thirteenth century.  The extension of the meaning to a generalized "slight indentation or impression in any surface" is from the 1630s.  The related noun philtrum (dimple in the middle of the upper lip), first noted 1703, is medical Latin, from a Latinized form of Greek philtron, (literally "love charm").  Dimple is a noun; the verbs (used with object) are dimpling & dimpled (which is also an adjective).  Synonyms (applied to non-human dimples) include divot, hollow, concavity, cleft, dent, pit & depression.

Young lady with dimple.  A dimple will always draw the eye.

Tantrum

Tantrum (pronounced tan-truhm)

(1) A violent demonstration of rage or frustration; a sudden burst of ill temper, most associated with children but widely applied to the childish outbursts of adults.

(2) To have a tantrum.

1714: One of English’s etymological mysteries, other than being derived from the earlier tanterum, the origin is so obscure there’s no evidence on which to base speculation and while the first known reference in writing is from 1714, it’s likely it had been in (presumably colloquial) oral use for some time.  There are conventions of use such as “temper tantrum” & the common intransitive “throw a tantrum”; synonymous words and phrases include angry outburst, flare-up, fit of rage, conniptions, dander, huff, hysterics, storm, wax, hissy fit & dummy spit.  Tantrum is a noun & verb, tantrumming & tantrumed are verbs and tantrumy is an adjective; the noun plural is tantrums.  The noun tantrummery (on the model of constructions like poltroonery) is non-standard but is sometimes used in political commentary.

Social media, SMS or email posts in ALL CAPS or with an extravagant use of question marks (?????) or exclamation marks (!!!!!) convey shouting and are the textual version of a tantrum although this understanding was learned behaviour; many early systems (Telix etc) available only with upper case characters so there was a greater dependency on (?????) & (!!!!!) to denote anger, the asterisk (*****) & hash (#####) symbols inserted to permit vulgarities (f**k, sh## et al) to be understood without being spelled out.  That was a work-around of some significance because the telecommunication legislation in many nations actually prohibited swearing (even on telephone voice calls) over what was then called a “carriage service”, typical wording in the acts being something like: It shall be unlawful for any person in the operation of any telephone installed within the city, to make use of any vulgar vituperation or profane language into and over such telephone.  (Profanity over telephone: (Code of ordinances, Colombus Georgia, USA, (§ 663 (1914)), Section 14-49).  Such laws probably still exist in many places but instances of enforcement doubtless;y are rare.

Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD)

Remarkably, as a definable condition, the temper tantrum wasn’t medicalized (as a distinct diagnosis) until 2013 when the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) was published.  Named Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder (DMDD), it was classified as a mood disorder noted as affecting children aged 6-18, an unusual concession by the industry that tantrums in very young children are a normal and healthy (if annoying) aspect of human development.

DMDD was thus a new diagnosis but it really was a shift in classification, reflecting the early twenty-first century view that both the autism spectrum and bipolar disorder (BD, the old manic-depression) were being over-diagnosed.  Also a condition that can cause extreme changes in mood, it was noted that misdiagnosing BD can result in unnecessary medications being prescribed, the long-term use of which were associated with side effects including weight gain, lipid & glucose abnormalities and  reduced brain volume (and a diminished number of neurons in the brain).  Thus it being undesirable that BD be over-diagnosed in the young, DMDD exists as an alternative and, although many of the mood-related symptoms overlap with BD, there are as yet no FDA (the US Food and Drug Administration) approved medications for children or adolescents with DMDD and in the recent history of the DSM, that’s unusual.  There have been instances of updates to the DSM removing diagnoses while the specified drug remains on the FDA schedule but it’s rare for one to appear without an approved medication, the symbiosis between the industries usually well-synchronized.  Advice to clinicians continue to include the note that stimulants, antidepressants, and atypical antipsychotics can be used to help relieve a child’s DMDD symptoms but that side effects would need to be monitored, individual and family therapy to address emotion-regulation skills a desirable alternative to be pursued where possible.  The behavioral distinction between DMDD and BD is that subjects don’t experience the episodic mania of a child with BD and they’re at no greater risk of later developing BD although there is a higher anxiety as an adult.  Because of the potentially stigmatizing effects (possibly for life) of a diagnosis of BD, that’s something which should be applied only with a strict application of the criteria.

The tabloid press like the word "tantrum" and uses it often of certain celebrities, politicians and such.

It’s further noted that DMDD is a diagnosis that should apply to a specific type of mood (the tantrum) distinguished by being extreme and/or frequent; it should thus (as parents have doubtless always regarded tantrums) be thought a spectrum condition.  The markers include (1) severe, chronic irritability, (2) severe verbal or behavioral tantrums, several times weekly for at least a year, (3) reactions out of proportion to the situation, (4) difficulty functioning because of outbursts and tantrums, (5) aggressive behavior & (6) a frequent transgression of rules.  Observationally, DMDD may be indicated by (7) trouble in socializing and forming friendships, (8) physically aggression towards peers and family and even (9) difficulties in the cooperative aspects of playing team sports (although not merely a preference for individual disciplines).  The diagnostic criteria for DMDD require a child to have experienced tantrums (which are severe and/or of long duration) at least three times weekly for at least a year’ especially if between episodes they’re also chronically irritable.  However, if the tantrums are geographically or situationally specific (ie happen only at school or only at church etc) then DMDD may not be the appropriate diagnosis and other disorders (childhood bipolar disorder (CBD), autism, oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)) may need to be considered.  A particular difficulty in the diagnostic process is that not only is there a significant overlap of symptoms in these disorders but instances of conditions themselves can co-exist.  With children, it’s recommended that when possible, DMDD treatment begins with therapy (psychotherapy and parent training), medications prescribed only later in treatment or at least starting in conjunction with therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) thought helpful.

Noted temper tantrums

3 Ketchup Bottles (2021) by Kristin Kossi (b 1984), Acrylic on Canvas, US$8000 at Singulart.

Details of President Trump’s (Donald Trump, b 1946, US president 2017-2021) tantrum which included his ketchup laden lunch ending up oozing down an Oval Office wall were recounted during the congressional hearings into matters relating to the attempted insurrection on 6 January 2021.  Although apparently not the first time plates were smashed in the Trump White House during episodic presidential petulance, such outbursts by heads of government are not rare.  Indeed, given the stress and public scrutiny to which such folk are subject, it’s surprising there aren’t more although it’s usually only years later, as memoirs emerge, that the tales are told.

Warren Harding (1865–1923; US president 1921-1923) was once observed strangling a government official with his bare hands although that might have been understandable, his administration notoriously riddled with corruption.  When Harding dropped dead during his term, it was probably a good career move.  Adolf Hitler’s (1889-1945; head of state (1934-1945) and government (1933-1945) in Nazi Germany) ranting meltdown in the Führerbunker on 21 April 1945 as the Red Army closed on Berlin became a tantrum of legend and was the great set piece of the film Downfall (2004) about the last days of the Third Reich, a scene which has since generated hundreds of memes.  Even before the Watergate scandal began to consume his presidency, Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974) was known for his temper tantrums, often under the influence of alcohol.  His aides would later recount his expletive-laden tirades during which, apparently seriously, he would order bombings, missile launches and assassinations.  All such instructions Nixon issued during these drunken tantrums were ignored and if informed the next day that the relevant military action or murder had not been carried out, usually he would respond: "Good".  His predecessor’s, (Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969)) moods were said to be just as volatile and during episodes he would sometimes wish for whole countries to be destroyed although he stopped short actually of ordering it.

Admiring glance: George Stephanopoulos looking at crooked Hillary Clinton.

Reports of Bill Clinton’s (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) tantrums tend to emphasize their frequency and intensity but note also how quickly they subsided.  In the memoir of George Stephanopoulos ((b 1961; White House Communications Director 1993 & presidential advisor 1993-1996)) focusing on his time as communications director, it’s recounted that Clinton regularly lost his temper and would yell at the staff, the in-house code for the outbursts being “purple fits”, so named because of how red Clinton’s face became during the SMOs “Standard Morning Outbursts”.  Secret Service staff later interviewed were kinder in their recollections of the president but seemed still traumatized when describing his wife’s volcanic temper and Bill Clinton’s outbursts do need to be viewed in the context of him being married to crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013).

Anthony Eden (1897–1977; UK prime-minister 1955-1957) was elegant, stylish and highly strung; one of his colleagues, in a reference to his parentage, described Eden as “half mad baronet, half beautiful woman” and his great misfortune was to become prime-minister, the role for which he’d so long been groomed.  Ill-suited to the role and in some ways unlucky, his tantrums became the stuff of Westminster and Whitehall folklore, reflected in the diary entry of Winston Churchill’s (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1965 & 1951-1955) physician (Lord Moran, 1885-1975) on 21 July 1956: “The political world is full of Eden's moods at No 10 (Downing Street, the PM’s London residence)”.  The tales of his ranting and raging appeared in much that was published after his fall from office but in the years since, research suggests there was both exaggeration and some outright invention, one contemporary acknowledging that while Eden certainly was highly strung, “…he seldom became angry when really important matters were involved, but instead did so over irritating trivialities, usually in his own home, and very seldom did he lose his temper in public”.  Unfortunately, the best-known "tantrum" story of the 1956 Suez Crisis in which Eden is alleged to have thrown an full inkwell at someone with whom he disagreed (a rubbish bin said to have been jammed on his head in response), is almost certainly apocryphal.

TERF & Terf

TERF & Terf (pronounced turf)

(1) The acronym for trans-exclusionary radical feminist (trans-exclusionary radical feminism), a fork of the fork of radical feminism which maintains a trans woman’s gender identity is not legitimate and rejects the inclusion of trans people and the gender-diverse in the feminist movement.

(2) In genetics as (1) TERF 1 (Telomeric repeat-binding factor 1), a protein which in  humans is encoded by the TERF1 gene & (2) TERF 2 (Telomeric repeat-binding factor 2), a protein present at telomeres throughout the cell cycle. 

2008: Coined by Australian feminist writer Viv Smythe (@vivsmythe (fka @tigtog, @hoydenabouttown & @GFIComedy) although Ms Smythe suggests the acronym may previously have been in use but her blog entry is the oldest instance extant, hence the credit.  By virtue of use, TERF has become a word and thus the noun terf (and its variations) is correct.  The use in genetics dates from the 1990s , the definitions written as part of the project which decoded the human genome (the complete results of which weren't released until March 2022).   

TERF was said first to have been coined as a “deliberately neutral” descriptor of a certain intellectual position among certain feminists, CISgender women who self-identify as feminist but who oppose including transgender women in spaces (physical, virtual & philosophical) which their construct of feminism reserved for those assigned female at birth.  Implicit in this is the denial that trans women (or anyone anywhere on the trans gender spectrum) are women; they regard them as men and because, by definition, men cannot coexist with their feminist construct, they must be excluded.  However, though TERF was of the feminists, by a feminist, for the feminists, once in the wild it is public property and TERF didn’t long stay neutral, soon used as a slur, applied as a term of disparagement by those sympathetic to trans rights and just as quickly embraced by some TERFs in an act of reclamation (a la slut, the infamous n-word etc).  In use online since at least 2008, TERF has different connotations, depending on who is using it but even when it’s been applied as something purely descriptive, feminists who have been labeled TERF have called the term a slur because it has come to be associated with violence and hatred.  It is a loaded term.

Sainte Jeanne d'Arc (Saint Joan of Arc) (1903) by Albert Lynch (1860–1950).  Joan of Arc with proto TERF bangs: latter day TERFs arouse such hatred there have probably been whisperings of burnings at the stake.

The coining of TERF inspired some neologisms.  TERF bangs (existing only in the plural and noted since 2013 although use didn't trend until 2014) is a sardonic reference to a woman's hairstyle with short, straight, blunt-edged bangs (historically called baby bangs and a variation of what's known by some hairdressers as the "Joan of Arc" fringe), especially when paired with a bob and claimed to be associated with TERFs, the link impressionistic and possibly an example of a gaboso (generalized association based on single-observation).  The link is thought to be part of the opposition to transphobia, the TERF bangs noted for their relationship to the Karen (speak to the manager) bob and all Karens are assumed to be transphobic.  TERFdom is either (1) the holding (and expression) of trans-exclusionary feminist views or (2) being in some way present in the on-line TERF ecosystem.  TERFism is the abstract noun denoting variously the action, practice, state, condition, principle, doctrine, usage, characteristic, devotion or adherence to TERFDom.  TERfturf is an expression variously of the physical, virtual or philosophical space occupied by TERFdom.  TERFy, TURFish & TERFic are adjectives (usually applied disparagingly) which suggest someone or something may be tending towards, characteristic of, or related to trans-exclusionary feminism or those who hold such views.  It's tempting to ponder TERFery, TERFed & TERFistic and the use to which they might be put but there's scant evidence of use.

TERF also provided the model for the back-formation acronym SWERF (sex worker exclusionary radical feminist), describing the position of those radical feminists opposed to the sex industry (including pornography), regarding all aspects of the business as exploitative and that women who participate are victims of coercion, any assertion of agency or willing participation a form of false consciousness.

TERF, TWERF and others

Whatever the life TERF subsequently took, Ms Smythe’s original piece was a critique of the undercurrent of transphobia in the UK British media, something hardly hard to detect nor restricted to the most squalid of the tabloids.  However, as she noted, regardless of her purpose or the context of the text, TERF has became a weaponized device of the culture wars which, in the way of the battle, assumed its identities at the extremes of the trans-inclusion & trans-exclusion positions and it could hardly have followed a different course, the notion, however applied, hardly one amenable to subtle nuances (although some have tried).  That it had the effect of being an inherently schismatic force in radical feminism seemed especially to disturb Ms Smythe and later she would suggest a more accurate (or certainly less divisive) acronym would have been “…TES, with the “S” standing for separatists”, adding that many “…of the positions that are presented seem far too essentialist to be adequately described as feminist, let alone radical feminist.”  Of course, that view was in itself exclusivist and a kind of assertion of ownership of both “radical” and “feminist” but that’s entirely in the tradition of political philosophy including the strains which long pre-date modern feminism, gatekeepers never hesitant in lowering the intellectual portcullis, intruders rarely welcome.

Still, it wasn’t as if feminism had been immune from the fissiparousness which so often afflicted movements (secular and otherwise), the devolution into into competing doctrinal orthodoxies of course creating heretics and heroes and to think of the accepted structure of the history (first wave, second wave etc) as lineal is misleading.  Nor was the process organic and it has been claimed there are TERFs (notably some of the self-described) for whom the identification with feminism became attractive only when it seemed to offer a intellectual cloak under which push transphobia, an accusation leveled at members of the US organization Gender Identity Watch (GIW).   Described variously as a “hate group” and the “Republican party in sensible shoes”, GIW’s best known activities include lobbying and monitoring legislatures and courts to try to ensure those who are transgender are not granted either the status of women or whatever rights may accrue from that.  Their basis was simply definitional, those designated male at birth (DMaB) can never be anything beyond men in disguise (MiD) and thus have no place in women’s spaces.

Other theorists developed their own form of exclusivism.  The idea behind the back-formation TWERF (Trans Women Exclusionary Radical Feminist) was that it was "pure womanism", the needs of trans women being not only different from “real” women but irrelevant too, again by definition because trans women are still men and even if in some way defined as not, were still not “real” women.  The distinctions drawn by the TWERFs was certainly a particular strain of radical feminism because they raised no objection to the presence of trans men, the agender and even some other non-binary people into at least some of their women-only spaces although the rationale offered to support this position did seem sometimes contradictory.  Some however seemed well to understand the meaning and they were the transsexual separatists, apparently a cause without rebels, support for the view apparently close to zero.  The transsexual separatists argue that they need to be treated, for the purposes of defined rights, as a separate category, a concept which received little attention until the Fédération internationale de notation (Fina, the International Swimming Federation) in June 2022 announced a ban on the participation of transgender women from elite female competition if they have experienced “…any part of male puberty beyond Tanner Stage 2 or before age twelve, whichever is later."  As something a workaround designed somehow to combine inclusion and exclusion in the one policy, Fina undertook to create a working group to design an “open” category for trans women in “some events” as part of its new policy.  The transsexual separatists may not have expected Fina to be the first mainstream organization to offer a supporting gesture but what the federation has done may stimulate discussion, even if the work-around proves unworkable.

Discursiveness is however in the nature of feminist thought, the essence of the phases of renewal which characterized progress, formalized (if sometimes misleadingly) as waves and it’s unrealistic to imagine trans-related issues will be resolved until generational change allows a new orthodoxy to coalesce.  It really wasn’t until the high-water mark of second wave of feminism in the early 1980s that some of the early radical feminists began to attempt to distance the movement from the issues pertaining to trans people, reflecting the view that the implications of what was characterized as the transgender agenda would only reinforce sexual stereotyping and the gender binary.  Even then, the position taken by radical feminists was not monolithic but it was the exclusionists who attracted most interest, inevitable perhaps given they offered the media a conflictual lens through which to view the then somewhat novel matter of trans rights, until then rarely discussed.  Third wave feminism was a product of the environment in which it emerged and thus reflected the wider acceptance of transgender rights and few would argue this has not continued during the fourth wave, the attention given to TERF (and its forks and variations) an indication of the interest in the culture wars and the lure of conflict in media content (whether tabloid or twitter) rather than any indication a generalized hardening of opposition among feminists.

Preposition

Preposition (pronounced prep-uh-zish-uhn)

(1) In English grammar, any member of a class of words found in many languages that are used before nouns, pronouns, or other substantives to form phrases functioning as modifiers of verbs, nouns, or adjectives, and that typically express a spatial, temporal, or other relationship, as in, on, by, to, since.

(2) To position in something in advance or beforehand (often as pre-position).

(3)  An exposition; a discourse (obsolete).

1350-1400: From the Middle English preposicioun (in grammar: "indeclinable part of speech regularly placed before and governing a noun in an oblique case and showing its relation to a verb, adjective, or other noun"), from the Old French preposicion, from the Latin praepositiōn & praepositionem (nominative praepositio) (a putting before, a prefixing), noun of action from the past-participle stem of praeponere (put before), the construct being prae- (before (source of the English pre-)) + pōnere (put, set, place (past participle positus and related to  praepono (to place before)).  In grammatical use, it was a loan-translation of the Greek prothesis (literally "a setting before").  In the Old English, foresetnys was a loan-translation of the Latin praepositio and it exists in modern French as préposition.  In grammar, it's so called because it's placed before the word with which it's phrased (eg block of iron) and the more recent form meaning “to position in something in advance or beforehand” appears not to have been used before the early 1960s.

Sentences and prepositions

Another example of the medieval reverence for Latin, the “rule” in English that a sentence should not end with a preposition is an import from the classical language and an accurate description of the old practice.  English grammar however differs from the Latin, and the rule does not fit English where, certainly in speech, a final preposition is normal and idiomatic.  In short, the “rule”, which in Modern English Usage (1926), Henry Fowler (1858-1933) dismissed as a "cherished superstition" never existed, although many attempted enforcement.  

Portrait of John Dryden (1730) by George Vertue (1684-1756), line engraving on paper, Scottish National Portrait Gallery (Print Room).

Some have even been converts to the cause.  The younger John Dryden (1631–1700), a fine stylist of English and the nation's first poet laureate, would lace his sentences with terminal propositions yet in later life would edit his first editions "correcting" the indiscretions of youth, explaining that "...in considering whether what I write be the idiom of the tongue, …and have no other way to clear my doubts but by translating my English into Latin".  This Fowler would paraphrase as "...you cannot put a preposition (roughly speaking) later than its word in Latin and therefore you must not do so in English".  Even in the seventeenth century few were as punctilious although Fowler did note Edward Gibbon's (1737-1794) refinement of the "rule": Discerning "...that prepositions and adverbs are not always easily distinguished, kept on the safe side by not ending sentences with "on", "over", "under" or the like, even when they would have been adverbs".  Like those who care nothing for that other non-rule, the dreaded split infinitive, yet never commit it to writing lest they be thought unsophisticated by the fastidious, Gibbon wanted to keep up appearances.  Like Gibbon, Dryden's quill secured his reputation as a writer, his downfall nothing to do with his English, dismissed in 1689 from the laureateship because, as a devout papist, he refused to swear an oath of allegiance when the crown passed into protestant hands.  Up with such he had to put.  

There is a case to avoid the practice in writing but only if the “rule” is applied to the whole text.  Technically, the problem of placing the preposition arises most when a sentence ends with a relative clause in which the relative pronoun (that; whom; which; whomever) is the object of a preposition.  Where writing is edited to be formal, when a pronoun other than that introduces a final relative clause, the preposition usually precedes its object: “He finished the painting to which he had devoted twelve years.”  If the pronoun is that, which cannot be preceded by a preposition, or if the pronoun is omitted, then the preposition must occur at the end: “The librarian found the books that the child had scribbled in.”  Adherence to the rule does tend to render text which appears more correct grammatically even if frequently it differs from English as it is spoken: people tend to say “what did you step on?” not “on what did you step?”

Among stylists of language, other “rules” have been suggested such as avoiding unnecessary prepositions; “I stepped off the ship” is better than “I stepped off of the ship”.  Some authorities also maintain there should be a comma after prepositional phrases at the beginning of a sentence, one publication insisting one is obligatory if the phrase is longer than four words.  While that may seem arbitrary, if applied consistently, it will enhance the rhythm of the text.