So yuo don’t like being called a rake? 
Nah, I prefer “slacker”.
Well, it’s also an animal term, something found in spades (ha) when it comes to words for women. Cow, bitch, nag, pussy, sex kitten, shrew, vixen… I mean, you could argue that any of those are offensive and not offensive depending on the context – but then it’s all context.
(I think this thread is done, but what the hey.)
Just so we’re clear, what conclusion do you draw from this fact?
It’s kind of hard to see quite a few as offensive in any but the strangest situations…
“She’s a total vixen.”
“You take that back!!!”
If we resurrect it after a half a year can we say “I agree with everything she said, and yet, NNNYYYRRRRRAAAAARRRRRRRGGGHHHHH, BRAINSSSSS!”
That throughout history (and currently, throughout the world) women have often been compared to animals and enjoyed subhuman status, so there are tons of animal-related synonyms to pull from?
“Grudgingly concede?”
I don’t know how your setup works, but there’s like, all kinds of places in my house that are not my computer, and all kinds of places on my internet that are not this thread. The entire rest of the world hasn’t yet ground down my willpower to the point that I’m forced to involuntarily comment on Straight Dope controversies.
Edit: also I’d like to share with everyone the following bit of scholarship from Wikipedia:
In case you thought it meant something else.
Comparisons to animals aren’t uniquely applied to women, though. Animal comparisons are some of the most common metaphors in the English language - in just about any language, I suspect. I don’t think one can create a meaningful link between, “often compared to animals,” and “subhuman status.” Unless one wants to argue that Richard the Lion-Hearted was considered subhuman by his contemporaries.
Now, one can make some valid conclusions about the status of women in a society by examining what sorts of animals they’re most commonly compared to. But, again, that doesn’t prove that each individual comparison is offensive. Just because “bitch” is offensive, it does not automatically follow that “chick” is.
Yeah, men can be such sexist pigs.
Stud! Stallion! Workhorse! Lone wolf! Top dog! Strong as an ox! It’s almost as though we were animals, at some point distant…
Jimmy… you know that part between the quotation marks was supposed to be you paraphrased, right?
So your implication is that using non-human imagery is, by definition, somehow tied to ‘subhuman’ status? And/or that there aren’t also a large number of non-human comparisons that we can use when describing someone of either gender?
Shush! Go lie down in the corner!
Meh. I’d like everyone with a female boss to start calling them a chick wherever they might call a male boss a guy. And if she or anyone else has a problem with it, show her the thread.
Wait, because “chick” isn’t equivalent to “guy” that proves what, exactly? I doubt many people would also refer to their male boss as a “dude”, or what have you.
What are acceptable slang terms for ‘woman’, in your lexicon? I assume you’d have a problem with either “gal” or “girl”?
Again, “chick” is an informal term, and talking to your boss is a formal situation. Just because it’s inappropriate to use with your boss doesn’t mean that it’s offensive.
Also, to the extent that these terms exist as gendered pairs, “chick” is not the opposite of “guy.” “Girl” is the opposite to “guy.” If “chick” has an opposite, it’d probably be “dude.” But even then, these are not perfect binaries. I could probably get away with referring to a male boss as a dude easier than I could a female boss as a chick. But does that mean that “chick” is inherently offensive? Or is it because there’s a stronger social taboo against familiarity with a female boss than there is with a male boss?
Dude isn’t comparable because it can be used as a 2nd person pronoun in place of ‘you’, or in the 3rd person as well. I’ve never heard ‘chick’ used in the 2nd person pronoun sense.
The only thing female near equivalent I can thnk of is ‘babe’, but only in the sense of being applicable in the 2nd or 3rd person. It has some other connotations which make it… not equivalent to ‘dude’ either.
But that shows us nothing and tells us less. Yes, English has a different ‘gendered sets’ of nouns, adjectives, etc… and they’re not always fungible. But it smacks of sophomoric literary criticism to go from there to seeing an overarching social narrative in whether or not “gal” is more or less colloquial than “guy”.
They probably learned it when they were kids.
Best user name/post combo ever!
Right. And you said “grudgingly concede,” so I pointed out that I didn’t have to say anything at all if I really didn’t want to disagree with the OP.
Why hasn’t anyone said hung like a horse yet?