This morning the sun came out to shine prettily on what was left of yesterday’s snow, now rather icy after a partial thaw. More snow had been forecast for overnight but didn’t appear. But the schools were closed again – I don’t know why, they wouldn’t have been in this weather when I was young. So even quite early some children were gathering in the park near my house around the remains of what I as a child would have called a snowman, the centrepiece of this general shot of the park:
But it seems I shouldn’t use that term any more. James Spinti from Minnesota, where such things can be made much more often than here, would call it a snowperson. But a little girl from my own town knew exactly what to call the one she made: a snowwoman!
I’ve never heard of a snowperson or snowwoman before.
Nor had I, Nathan, until Monday. But then I hadn’t seen a proper one for years, as we hadn’t had as much snow for 18 years which goes back almost to pre-PC days. I guess you don’t see too many of them in Texas, but if you did they would be huge and very male!
Thanks for being gender-correct 🙂
James
Bishop Alan still refers to a snowman, but since this is in the all-male environment of a monastery I suppose that’s OK. 😉
Fun wasn’t it?
Yes, Mike! But there was a serious point to this post, that even Minnesotan conservative Christians and young children in England realise that “man” implies maleness and shouldn’t be used of gender generic beings.