MY blackberries are in a stand-off with some chokecherries.

(Right. These are rose hips pictured ... humor me, will ya.)
When chokecherry-like impulses rise up in us, which they will, such as when we're afraid, sometimes for reasons we can't even identify, or when we feel defensive, initially interpreting a response to be patronizing, or whatever, we might run into the old whose-is-what? confusion. Abraham-Hicks has a great analogy when a person worries: "What's in my pie?" wanting to protect it, not wanting what's going in anybody else's to splash over into mine. (I have simplified their pie fun almost beyond recognition; message me if you would like the full story.)
The thing I want to remember is, because I create my reality with my thoughts, I get to have my pie any way I like. No one can say or do anything that gets 'in my pie.' And, likewise, absolutely, everybody else gets to have their pie precisely to preference also. Even if the fleeting (un-acted upon) impulse does arise, the only way I could dump choke cherries into somebody else's pie is if they let me. And just as I can't in theirs, nobody, can 'mess in my pie' nor 'rain on our parade' unless we give over our clarity, our happiness, our comfort with who we are and what we know to that person/event. We always have a choice in how we're going to feel about whatever comes up.
So, with this word as with everything else, choose when you use it, choose if you do. And I'll be over here, savoring my pie regardless. I can offer - 'Mmmm, would you like a bit of what I've chosen? I sure like them in mine.' - knowing each person will give something new a try or not, or express openness in encouraging the choice even if they pass for themselves, or not, according to their own inner barometer. Some of you may be giving the word further thought. Perhaps next year at the peak of the season you'll want to give it a try.

 

On the more playful side ...

Ha ha! Look how comfortably the bare bones wom can sidle up to naked ladies.*


*a.k.a. Amaryllis, or belladonna lily

 

Would love to see your pictures of the word wom out in the world. 
Or any stories of our foremothers' mirth.

 

Okay, here I go again -- thinking!

<mce:script type="><mce:script type=">x Geneva;">... yes, I got to thinking how in my understanding of our historical patriarchy here in the US

(I assert historical because I actually don't live "there" anymore, in a patriarchal society ... much; much prefer leaning into an egalitarian time, gender-wise)

... heretofore though, but of course, the name for any pants-off delicate, quick-to-wilt flower would have been passed on, generation to generation, as a "naked lady." Where have we in our identifications of flora, culturally speaking, any 'men in buff'?

(Ok, pause to acknowledge the countless cultures within the "norm." Perhaps in a group outside my experience, terms were actually more equal, even in the US.)

I wince a little too, at opening this invitation to my Wall. To be clear, no, I'm not looking for any angry visuals, such as one former feminist's irritated projection, thrust at the Italian cypress for its pointed presence across Central California.

I'm talkin g about naming - how nametags serve in our enculturation, from a very early age. Anyone know of an opposite, gender-wise, to the subtle implications in the moniker "naked ladies?"

 

Seems like a good time to post a pic of my "ahhhhh," just to remind myself of the direction I am honoring up.

 

Ahhh, man and wom. Now THAT has a nice ring to it. Happy day!

 

 

More reflections from Facebook page, 2011:

 

E Sandy Powell I do believe that eventually the relationship between the words man/wom wom/man, and balance therein, will feel so natural to us, and such a reflection of our 'just getting on with life, together' that we'll have trouble remembering when the identifiers didn't weigh in so vibrationally matched. Man. Wom. Again, ahhhhhh.

 

 

From a linguist: << Importantly, it seems, successful lexical innovations fill a gap in the language. >> She had reservations, that the word "wom" didn't serve any missing aspect in the word "woman."

Though I certainly honor her training and perspective, I see "wom" as wholly different from its predecessors.

(See "Beyond the roar ... wom" in full pdf, the chapter "Not Talking with Oprah" in particular, for discourse on the evolution of the female identifier.) The word "wom" slides us into completion, into a -- finally! -- equal and balanced relation with "man."

 

 

A comment I just got from a man, via Fb mssg: << I'm all for the word 'wom' becoming part of the lexicon. To me, it feels like the word 'fam' for family. So it has a playful, slang feel to me rather than one which is more serious. >> (Rob, if you happen by here, please feel free to post directly on my Wall and I'll remove this quote.)

 

E Sandy Powell I too like the playful nature of "wom."

And I don't mind at all playing the fool, lightheartedly, yet seriously, looking forward to logging in 999,950 more men, wom and children with openness to the word "wom." http://www.beyondtheroar.com/indicate-your-opennes-to-the-word-qwomq.html