You sound like a Ferengi. (which supports the liberal PC contention.)
I just wanna know what idiots think when somebody who says “female” or “male” when it’s damn obvious the subject matter is frackin human thinks they might possibly be referring to hamsters instead that have a hole rather than a pole or the reverse.
It might or might not be “depersonalizing” but it ain’t frickin “dehumanizing”.
I’m curious how four thread pages of explanation, examples, and data leads you to the conclusion that the problem with calling a woman “a female” is that it’s ambiguous.
The problem is that it’s insulting.
You know, those coloreds have been getting uppity lately.
And the reasons given that it’s insulting?
Besides the fact that it can be insulting because how it is being used. But thats not a function of a given word (for the most part), it’s how its being USED.
A word becomes an insult when one has experienced it being used in an insulting manner. This is not something you can necessarily prove with dictionaries and this is exactly what is being referred to when one is asked to defer to the experience of someone else.
Oh, my God… you mean context matters?!?! Well, that explains the confused looks I got when I said Labor Day was when all babies were born.
Somewhat tangential to the topic, but were you appalled and horrified (like pretty much every honest, open-minded person was) when President of The United States offered his condolences to the family of this violent criminal, but not a peep was heard from him in support of the police officer, who was found to be fully justified in protecting himself and the community he was sworn to protect?
Yes, that is somewhat tangential to the topic.
I’m quoting your very informative and relevant post in full, as I’d love to see the OP and the OP’s sympathizers reply to the points you raise.
Specifically, it would be interesting to get their responses to:
[ul]
[li]your anecdote about physicians being aware of “man” (instead of “male”) as being desirable usage in patient presentations; [/li]
[li]your comment about a pattern of behavior that many who’ve seen Bill O’Reilly at work are aware of–the casting of everyone’s life-experience as somehow being about O’Reilly, not about the person who actually had the experience.[/li][/ul]
For the latter, I’m not hoping for a discussion of O’Reilly in particular–but instead, about the mental habit and/or pattern of conduct he’s known for. That is, the defensiveness he displays whenever it’s suggested that his perceptions are not the only perceptions, and his interpretations are not the only interpretations.
Incidentally, if Charlize Theron’s character on Arrested Development could not have been described as a “female” (well, an MRF), then whole chunks of the third season would have made no sense at all.
I really don’t follow, could you use specific language instead of an analogy please?
I forget… is it okay to talk about Fact Club?
The first group is from advertisers and news organizations who tend to avoid slang, plus boring white people commenting on politics, while the second group is from skin click bait sites and actual human beings talking to each other. I’m not sure what was dehumanizing or sexist about Rachel’s comment. It seemed pro-feminist to me.
Here’s some cherry picking.
Female:
Hailey Parsons ️ @HaileyParsonsRM
If you’re a female who judges other females for:
- not being a virgin
-being a virgin - wearing makeup
- not wearing makeup
Fuck off
A M A N D A @littleblackfox_
Females should be empowering other females!!! Not shaming each other or talking negative about each others appearances.
Cpt Dunsel @bbkld5
NCIS S2 DiNozzo: If he acted/spoke to any female I know like he talks/acts to Cate, he would be pissing from his nose #asshat
Candy Corn God @LoyalLamb85
Mariah was a threat. No other female was writing their albums right out the gate/producing/and had the vocal prowess she possessed
MrCompleterandom @kszwartz
RT if you are a male. Fav if you are a female.
A$AP Rocky @ASAPRockyTRILL
Put a female through hell & she still love you ? keep that girl
MRSPRETTYGANG @therealashani2
I need a female to do me a favor I’ll pay you $500 DM ME !
Women:
Joy @2WANDA302
We Bet You Dont Have Hot Women In Your Kitchen Like This
Mark Peters @wordlust
As a society, we desperately need better representation of women with different body types in my harem.
мя gяєєи @iGreenMonk
I really can’t believe the price some women pay for sunglasses.
I’m starting to think it’d be cheaper to get the kitchen window tinted.
BlacB @BlacB
Women are evil Bruh
Funny Quests @Jems_bond008
Real Women Being Very Naughty in Public
Bo$$ Lady @305miami6924
After today I confirmed I hate working w women & dating men.
Maybe I should work w men & just forget about dating altogether
TeBaby Baby @DATDAMNTEBABY
Mama told me not to hit on a women but I bat hoes in the mouth…
I know this is pointless because lots of people already think male/female is inherently dehumanizing and it’s a red flag for anyone who uses them. You could also say women using “female” when talking to other women doesn’t mean anything because they picked it up from the wider sexist culture. Or it’s worse if a man says it. That’s fine.
And…“female” as a noun STILL doesn’t belong on a college essay.
I swear in any other thread, 100% of you would look at this usage as an excuse to lament kids these days, “improper” English and the lowering of academic standards. But because you’ve decided it’s somehow the anti-PC, female is the hill you want to fight for?
The “male”/“female” debate seems picayune in the larger scope of this thread, based on its title. ITR seems to believe that restricting language is the same thing as telling the students what to think. As I see it, the underlying message of PC is to tell people to think when they speak/write. A college teaching students to think? Unthinkable, I guess.
Well, if there’s one thought that’s correct here it’s that framing an issue properly and dictating the type of discourse are integral to winning a debate or causing the social perception of an issue to change in your favor. “Illegal aliens/immigrants” vs “migrant/undocumented workers” is in fact the very example of this that we were given back in my high school US Government class. If you force people to use the latter, it paints a different mental picture and can actually affect people’s views of the subject.
Dictating the way we represent things is a very powerful tool, and it’s a large part of the reason politics is so reliant on soundbites and (nowadays) hashtaggable slogans. It’s why people are “pro-life” or “pro-choice” and not “anti-choice” or “pro-babykilling”.
I’m certainly sympathetic to banning slurs and hate speech. However, in a classroom context I don’t think it’s as clear cut where the “line” is on banning terms that aren’t almost universally recognized as such; because it does cause a very real power balance in favor of the viewpoints of the people dictating which terms are okay. And, I mean, the instructor has near-absolute power anyway so it’s not much surprise, but I do think an instructor needs to give serious thought in order to be sure that they’re not boxing their students’ thinking. They must consider what effect their rules may have in framing the debates that happen in their classes.
If the class is “I’m going to teach you about racism/sexism/homophobia/transphobia (etc). I consider these terms bad, so they’re off-limits”, well, fine, the point of the thing was convincing your students of the course’s thesis anyway. If the class is “let’s have a debate on these issues to hone your critical thinking skills”, then you need to be much more careful about whether you’re giving an implicit advantage to students who opt to take certain sides in a debate, and weigh that against the potential distress the language could cause (that the debate alone wouldn’t).
E: I don’t think males/females in specific is really a part of this problem, though.