SEXISM IN NAMING HURRICANES.
I must confess to being somewhat ambivalent on this issue.
On the one hand, hurricanes named after women are appropriate. They always remind me of my first wife, who invariably came in like a storm & left after an interlude of utter devastation in my life, taking with her the house and car.
At the same time, if you get a hurricane with a sweet name like “Alice,” who might have been a childhood sweetheart? Well, you get my meaning.
But is not the naming of these storms sexist?
Why not have some named after men, and perhaps more pertinent still, named in accordance with the impressions they evoke.
Thus a hurricane in Russia, (if that were at all feasible), could be called “Ivan” or “Vladimir” It’s got a nice ring to it.
In the West Indies, “Rasta man or Leroy” comes to mind.
In Italy “Giovanni or Francesco”.
“George or Marmaduke” in England and so on.
Men after all, especially men with ambition, aspire to having all sorts of things named after them, ranging from mountains and fauna to libraries & park benches, constellations & galaxies to church pews & grandkids.
Then of course, the hurricanes involved could have potential sinister qualities for which some historic male names are superb. This would have been of great benefit to any of you, who have assumed at some period in your lives, journalistic endeavor’s of a querulous nature.
Thus, “Hurricane Himmler lurks with evil intent off the Florida Keys coast” would create just the right amount of fear and apprehension to ensure a 100% success rate for an effective evacuation. Likewise, “Hurricane Attila sweeps into the Caucasus”.
Anyway, those are my initial thoughts, but I’m open to any Lit Net comments, or further suggestions from those of you, who like me, lay awake each night unable to sleep because such thoughts intrude into our brains.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Hurricane
