Police and military have used “male/female” for a long time intentionally because the terms are distancing. So when you bring them into ordinary conversation of course it has that same feel to it.
In Basic Training I heard the word “ladies” a lot. The funny thing was there were no women anywhere near us.
Chicks it is then. 
I have no problem with someone who uses both “male(s)” and “female(s)”. I understand that, among other places, the armed forces and police departments generally use them as nouns and I can see adopting that usage either outside of work or because you’re in a military- or law enforcement-heavy culture.*
What DOES raise my hackles/count as a (potential) red flag is using “female(s)” to indicate girls/women, but:
[ul]
[li] using “man/men” or “guy(s)” to indicate boys/men.[/li][li] or[/li][li] using terms like “someone”, “people”, “anyone” to refer to boys/men**. [/li][/ul]
The second one is a reflection of cultural attitudes that men are the “default” and women are a deviation from that (aka “men are people and women are women”). It pops up all around us – t-shirt websites that have SHIRTS and WOMEN’S SHIRTS for categories, a show/movie having a main cast of several guys and then one girl (whose character archetype is “The Girl”), medical research (continues to) use predominantly male subjects because of female monthly hormonal cycles, and so on.
But someone*** who consistently calls women “females” and calls men “men” or “guys” is more of a red flag for me. “Man” and “woman” only refer to humans. “Male” and “female” apply to any sexually-reproducing species. Hell, they even apply to hardware, like fasteners and connectors. 
IME, people who consistently refer to women as female(s) but use the human-only terms man/men/guy(s) for men do tend to have problematic attitudes regarding women. These attitudes can be intentional and consciously chosen or they can be absorbed without really noticing and just not examined or challenged. But they’re still there.
- [sub]Though I personally dislike the use because it is a lot more clinical, cold and distancing. Law enforcement clearly has power and has had problems with the abuse of that power – distancing language can (in a tiny, incremental way) support or contribute to an us-vs-them antagonistic mindset. Buuuut that’s different subject! [/sub]
** note this only refers to using these terms specifically for men, in contrast to women, and not for generic example person or mixed gender groups.
*** of whatever gender. Women are fully capable of being misogynist.
And that’s it exactly. If we rednecks can get it, anyone can.
And the word “women” already covers all people of the female gender regardless of age.
(AHunter: Referring to people of the female sex is rarely necessary and grouping trans men into a group called female is usually offensive.)
No it doesn’t at all. I have two daughters that are both pre-teens. They are not ‘women’ any more than I was a ‘man’ at that age. They are still very much girls in almost all ways and will be for many years to come. Do you honestly think that anyone is going to call a newborn or toddler female a ‘woman’ with a straight face and have that term completely accepted and understood by everyone? It doesn’t work simply because the term ‘woman’ explicitly implies a fully mature female just like ‘man’ implies a fully mature male.
This isn’t a western world specific idea at all either. Many cultures have elaborate ceremonies in which the members transition formally from one denominator to the other just like we do informally.
The only time I ever hear women referred to this way is on your trashy day time court shows. It’s always used by fairly unsavory types and I always take it as them either
a.used to hearing it because they’ve been around the court system
b. trying to sound more formal / educated
I generally think of it as a term black people use. Does anyone else notice that?
FWIW that’s the context that prompted the older thread I linked to earlier.
:smack: I can only just recall posting in that thread. Apparently my opinion on the subject hasn’t changed.
I didn’t say the word “woman.” If there’s only one, you can just specify sex an age simultaneously. I said “women” covers everyone. And it does. Girls can as well, although you have to be careful when you use it, being sure to contrast it with guys. And ladies has long included “young ladies,” which is why “ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls” is often shortened to just “ladies and gentlemen.”
I’ll go so far that to say that I’ve never heard the word “females” referring to humans outside of a sexist context. I’ve read it in some official reports, but I’ve never even heard it spoken even in a formal context. I’d say that you are the most likely to be misunderstood, implying sexism when you do not mean it.
No . . . no, I’m sorry, it doesn’t. English speakers do not refer to females under the age of adolescence as women. I’m dumbfounded that anyone would claim otherwise.
I’m not cis nor am I trans. (I am also not female but my opposite corner on a gender diagram would be). She would be a female man (or female boy if you prefer), but would be neither a trans man nor a woman.
I’m a gender invert. Male girl. Don’t tell me I’m being offensive when I dare to describe myself or my genderkin.