# Help coin a new word: people attracted to men, people attracted to women **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [February 11, 2011, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986 "2011-02-11T03:55:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![tumbleddown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@tumbleddown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tumbleddown)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/21 "2011-02-11T12:21:23Z")
> [@Rodgers01](#): > > I’m starting to think the English language needs a word for people who are attracted to men, and people who are attracted to women. Traditionally you’d simply write “men” and “women” under the assumption that everyone was straight (e.g., “Women go crazy for Colin Firth” or “Men love the Dallas cheerleaders”), but with increased LGBT awareness, that can be a little awkward. The problem here is that you’re looking for a creative solution to the wrong problem. The issue isn’t a lack of words for “people attracted to X” – a construction which is still exclusionary because it presumes both a gender binary _and_ monosexuality – but more the generalizations themselves. Even if you cling to the binary-monosexual construction, there’s _nothing_ that can accurately be asserted as true of all people who are attracted to men or women beyond the tautological self-definition. “Gynephiles love cheerleaders” type sentiments are just not good writing. It’s not a good assertion. It’s lazy, sloppy hyperbole for the sake of hyperbole and who needs that? We don’t need new words, we need to elevate and become more creative with our thinking. We need to break away from generalizations. We need to stop trying to construct new boxes because the old boxes are broken. Those boxes aren’t broken just because we’re more aware, they’re broken because certain concepts shouldn’t be so hemmed in, linguistically, to begin with. ---
**Author:** ![beartato](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9d8465/32.png) [@beartato](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beartato)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/22 "2011-02-11T14:26:23Z")
Clamdiggers and manfans. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/23 "2011-02-11T14:43:44Z")
> [@tumbleddown](#): > > Even if you cling to the binary-monosexual construction, there’s _nothing_ that can accurately be asserted as true of all people who are attracted to men or women beyond the tautological self-definition. You can make the same statement about all kinds of groups that we still find it useful to have words for. There’s nothing true of _all_ women except that they _are_ women, and so on. It seems perfectly possible to acknowledge all this and still be interested in, say, the prevailing opinion of people-attracted-to-men on some matter. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/24 "2011-02-11T14:45:55Z")
Vagifans and penilophiles. ---
**Author:** ![scamartistry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@scamartistry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scamartistry)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/25 "2011-02-11T16:45:35Z")
This is exactly what is wrong with america. The liberal termites. The P.C mob and their extreme fear of “insulting” someone, on the grounds that everybody is so “sensitive” and “easily-offended” . This nonsense has to stop, here is what you call this and what you call that: man like man = homo (as in homosexual, you know the \*\*Medical \*\*term) woman like woman = lesbian or homo man like woman = normal, need not to define this is the assumed preference woman like man = se above case closed, please close this horrible, destructive thread,america. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/26 "2011-02-11T16:54:53Z")
> [@scamartistry](#): > > This nonsense has to stop, here is what you call this and what you call that: > > man like man = homo (as in homosexual, you know the \*\*Medical \*\*term) > woman like woman = lesbian or homo > man like woman = normal, need not to define this is the assumed preference > woman like man = se above > > case closed, please close this horrible, destructive thread,america. The point is to be able to refer to sets composed of attracted-to-women (heterosexual men+homosexual women) versus attracted-to-men (heterosexual women+homosexual men). Presumably bisexuals of both genders are included in both sets. So we want terms for two large and partly-overlapping sets, each of varying gender. We already know how to talk about the four smaller gender-based sets you list. I’ll leave it to others to deal with your idea of “normal.” :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![MostlyClueless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@MostlyClueless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MostlyClueless)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/27 "2011-02-11T17:15:41Z")
**scamartistry** ; You’re wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Cuckoorex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Cuckoorex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cuckoorex)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/28 "2011-02-11T19:24:00Z")
It seems odd to try to force a new term for use in the context provided. Instead of “\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_s” go wild for Angelinia Jolie," why not say, “Angelina Jolie has a left a lot of people with mouths open and tongues wagging.” gender neutral, sexual orientation ambiguous. The focuz is on the object of attraction instead of the myriad people attracted to the object. ---
**Author:** ![filling\_pages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b9bd4f/32.png) [@filling\_pages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filling_pages)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/29 "2011-02-11T20:07:50Z")
> [@Hail\_Ants](#): > > Remember Ms.? There wasn’t anything wrong with that term itself, but how often do you ever hear it today? All the time. It’s the standard honorific used for addressing women in writing in any professional office where I have worked (unless, of course, she’s a Dr.). \*Dear Ms. Lastname: Blah Blah Blah\* That way, you don’t have to know their marriage status to write them an email. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/30 "2011-02-11T20:08:42Z")
As an example of how the terms would be useful: Way back when _X-Men United_ was in theaters, we were discussing Wolverine’s magic indestructible pants, that stayed on him even while he was getting disintegrated. I commented that it seemed unfair, that we straight men and lesbians got to see Rebbecca Romjin naked, and so straight women and gay men ought to be able to get to see Hugh Jackman naked. See how awkward that was? Saying “we men” and “women” would have flowed much smoother, but of course, some women did get to see what they wanted, and some men were disappointed. Now, obviously, not _all_ gynephiles find Rebbecca Romjin attractive, and not _all_ androphiles find Hugh Jackman attractive, but it’s a large enough proportion in both cases to be meaningful. ---
**Author:** ![Teacake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Teacake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Teacake)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/31 "2011-02-11T20:43:04Z")
> [@Hail\_Ants](#): > > Remember Ms.? There wasn’t anything wrong with that term itself, but how often do you ever hear it today? Every day. As mentioned, it’s used all the time in emails/letters, but also every school I’ve worked in referred to all female staff as Ms. ---
**Author:** ![llcoolbj77](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/eb9ed0/32.png) [@llcoolbj77](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/llcoolbj77)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/32 "2011-02-11T21:22:30Z")
> [@Hail\_Ants](#): > > Remember Ms.? There wasn’t anything wrong with that term itself, but how often do you ever hear it today? Every single day, several times a day. I am married, but didn’t change my last name. All the judges know I am married, because I married another local attorney. We were married by one of the judges. After we got married, most of the judges asked me if I was going to change my name. I said no. Every single day at work I am called Ms. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_. This includes all my colleagues, all my clients, and all the judges (including the new wave “activist judges” and the ones that are older than dirt and wouldn’t know PC if it fell out of the sky and hit them in the face). :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/33 "2011-02-11T23:34:37Z")
If you want something simple and casual, you can’t improve on “andros” and “gynos.” But what about bisexuals and asexuals? ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/34 "2011-02-11T23:43:24Z")
Moved Cafe Society --\> IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2011, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/35 "2011-02-11T23:51:11Z")
> [@panache45](#): > > If you want something simple and casual, you can’t improve on “andros” and “gynos.” But what about bisexuals and asexuals? A bisexual person is both andro(sexual) and gyno(sexual). An asexual person is neither. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2011, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/36 "2011-02-17T01:08:50Z")
While logical, most of these suggestions are rather dry. If we’re going to the trouble of coining new words, shouldn’t they be more fun? I vote for: vagibond penneisseur ---
**Author:** ![antonio107](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/7ea924/32.png) [@antonio107](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/antonio107)\ **Post date:** [February 17, 2011, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986/37 "2011-02-17T02:05:34Z")
> [@elfkin477](#): > > While logical, most of these suggestions are rather dry. If we’re going to the trouble of coining new words, shouldn’t they be more fun? > > I vote for: > vagibond > penneisseur Those are awesome. 😃 But both imply a high level of promiscuity. You could be down with the poontang but only have one female partner. Wouldn’t a vagibond wander from snatch to snatch? And Penisseurs would always go on and on about the shape and bouquet of a given penis, lol. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-coin-a-new-word-people-attracted-to-men-people-attracted-to-women/570986.md?page=1)