Language use and attitudes in Egypt and the larger Arab world pose a challenge to much of the received wisdom among sociolinguists about the role of gender in sociolinguistic variation. More generally, they cast doubt on widespread assumptions in sociolinguistics about the nature of linguistic markets and language change. Haeri's recent sociolinguistic investigations in Cairo show clearly the difficulties raised by viewing linguistic resources as based on a vernacular/standard continuum, with women leading men in use of established “standard” forms – and also (on this view, somewhat “paradoxically”) leading in use of “non-standard” incoming variants introduced in the speech of working-class and lower middle-class speakers. As Haeri points out, there is a paradox here only if one assumes that some unchanging social meaning is attached to the “standard/non-standard” dichotomy. But she points to many problems both with the dichotomy and with the way it is often understood in linguistic discussions. Haeri cogently argues against the common assumption that members of a speech community recognize a single “standard” that (a) is required for performance in high-level jobs, (b) is taught and promoted in educational institutions, (c) is the medium of highly valued literature and other culturally valued activities, and (d) is associated with upper-class speech. Although such a conception may not seem too distorting in many Western urban settings (some of my students spontaneously came up with “richspeak” to designate a so-called American English “standard”), it is woefully inadequate for understanding the sociolinguistic dynamics of a place like Cairo.