I’ve always been under the impression this word referrred only to a man of good and solid character, etc. I’ve only ever heard it used to refer to men, and that’s the only way I’ve used it as well. But I finally looked it up (at the link above) and saw there is no reference to gender in the definition. Does this mean that a mensch can be either a man OR a woman?
Well, in German it can, so I assume it would be the same for Yiddish. Mensch in German means “a human being”, though it it isn’t used the way it is in Yiddish to mean a real, upstanding, dependable person.
The English word “man” is related to this and was originally a gender neutral word for human; a different word related to the “were” in “werewolf” was the gender specific word for a male human.
As I use it, it has slight male connotations; I would probably say ‘He’s a mensch’, but ‘She acted like a mensch,’ but I’m only noticing this now, as I’m thinking about it. I probably use the gender-neutral adjectival form mencshlach (‘in a mensch-like fashion’, with the final consonant like the final consonant of Bach or the first of Chanuka) more than I’d use the noun form anyway.
When I was young, a Jewish friend described the word as meaning “person,” i.e. “He’s a real mensch, a swell guy,” sort of. She had trouble directly giving me a concrete meaning. I interpret it as “Stand-up kinda person,” but tending to mean male.
Joe
Traditionally, a mensch was a male, because that was the only context in which it had any meaning. Women did not take the roles in life to which mensch could be applied.
The world has changed, certainly, but I don’t think that the word has caught up. I’ve never heard it applied to a woman.
However, people say straight-faced these days of women, She’s got balls. If that’s true then sooner or later mensch will be gender-neutral.
I’ve only ever heard it applied to a male.
I could see how it could be used for a woman, but I think if it were, it would be in a way that was consciously gender-bending. In other words, if you said “She’s a mensch,” you’d be saying that she posessed positive traits–positive traits that are traditionally associated with men.
Sort of like how you can sometimes call a man a bitch if he’s catty.
It’s also possible it’s been conflated with the German word mentioned aove, which just means “man.” Aren’t Yiddish and German very closely related?
I think initially it was just for men (in the old days I think we all realize we were something of a sexist people), but I have heard it used for women. Granted it sounds like a more fleeting honorary title when used for women, but I have heard it used thus.
Well, yes and no. There are many linguistic relationships between Yiddish and German because Yiddish has most of its early roots in German culture. That stopped even before the mass migrations to the US in the mid and late 19th century, so that in fact most of the Yiddish-speaking population of the U.S. was from Eastern European countries. Is is questionable whether most Yiddish speakers themselves knew any German at the time. (Western and Eastern Yiddish dialects were quite distinct.)
It’s therefore a question of whether these terms were set into place before the east west split or whether they continued to evolve away from the German rootstock.
I don’t have anywhere near expertise enough to say how any single word evolved in meaning.
It’s just a person or physical human body.
Interesting. I’ve heard the word before, but I thought it referred to someone exceptional: not superhero status or anything, but definitely stronger and more moral than the average person. Am I wrong? Or an I just living among subferior deviates? 
Not a superhero, not even necessarily exceptional in that way, but definitely above average and noticeable for being so. An individual act can be the act of a mensch even if that person is not special at other times.
It’s a useful word, though, for a person who is like that on a regular basis. There is no good equivalent in English. He’s a “good guy” is hardly the same praise. And one can aspire to be a mensch in a way that would lead to ridicule as a prig or goody two-shoes if one were to articulate it in English.
To address Sunspace (while not really addressing the OP):
From Leo Rosten’s The Joys of Yiddish. (Rosten preferred simplified spelling, although he acknowledged the older form.)
[quote]
[ol][li]A human being. “After all, he is a mensh, not an animal.”[/li][li]An upright, honorable, decent person. “Come on, act like a mensh.”[/li][li]Someone of consequence; someone to admire and emulate; someone of noble character. “Now there is a real mensh.”[/ol][/li][/quote]
And later:
Yes, they are. It’s generally considered a separate language because it has had a distinct identity and literary tradition since the middle ages but it isn’t much more different from the standard dialect of High German (known to the outside world as “German”) than other things usually counted as dialects of German. Being part of the High German branch it is at any rate a lot closer than any dialect of Low German. In this case by “dialect” I mean their full forms with distinct grammar and vocabulary, not “announcer-speak with a regional accent” that is very common today. Subjectively it is reasonably intelligible even if I won’t get every word - perhaps comparable to Swiss German.
Do we have a native (or at least fully fluent) Yiddish speaker here? I would be surprised if it wasn’t also the generic word for “human” apart from the specialised sense that made it into English.
(On preview I think tomndebb covered that.)