To what e-mail address should this article be sent? What is your name? Your e-mail address? The Article: Objections from an etymologist John R. Holmes I was going to stay out of the discussion of polygamy and "chauvinism," since my objection was philological rather than philosophical. But, buoyed by the reflection that Nietzsche, too, was a philologist (making me guilty by association), and by the fact that the misuse of the word "chauvinist" was repeated for the third issue in a row in the October 2 Concourse, I will ply my trade as etymologist. It is quite likely that the feminist skewing of the word from its original meaning will stand, and that its original meaning is already an archaism (as are Nietzsche and I). Nicolas Chauvin, when the word was first coined from his name, was himself an anachronism. He had served under Napoleon in those devastating wars of the early nineteenth century, receiving seventeen wounds. When French sentiment turned against Napoleon later in the century, Chauvin refused to acknowledge any flaws in the emperor, becoming a bit of a laughingstock for his extreme (and misplaced) patriotism. Chauvinisme, then, referred to Nick's type of exaggerated devotion to one's own regime. Applying it to male supremacists in the term "male chauvinist" was actually, I think, a stroke of brilliance. But soon people who used the term forgot that it was essentially an analogy, and began using "chauvinist" as if it were a synonym for "sexist." As for the other philological issue, name-calling versus using the right name, I am reminded of the story about the nun who refused to do pastoral work near a construction site where she heard foul language. Father Murphy pleaded that these were simple men of the earth who just called a spade a spade. "Oh, no, Father," Sister objected, "they don't call it a spade. They call it a [supply your favorite expletive] shovel!" John R. Holmes, Dr. Holmes is an Associate Professor of English at FUS.