5 ms·

Females as a noun is used to refer to lower animals, I believe you mean women.

• archon 13y ago
  I referred to myself as male, not as a man, in the same way I referred to females rather than women. It's pretty obvious I wasn't using it in a demeaning way, unless I was also demeaning myself.
  • michh 13y ago
    It's not as commonly used to demean men, so that's not an excuse. Besides, you're not a Ferengi. Stop talking like you are.
• bdg 13y ago
  Source? Right now that's just reading like a baseless claim and it sounds ridiculous to me that "females" is derogatory. I've never heard of such a claim before in my entire life.
  • rdouble 13y ago
    Pretty much only creeps refer to women as females.
    • theorique 13y ago
      [citation needed]
      • rdouble 13y ago
        Ask your mom or sister what they think.
        • theorique 13y ago
          Well, if someone writes/says "males and females" or "men and women" it sounds perfectly normal. If someone writes/says "men and females" or "women and males" it sounds weird.
        • jjsz 13y ago
          I texted my sister: "Who said that?? The word female is not as degrading as broad."
  • steveklabnik 13y ago
    There are two reasons why "female" is problematic: 1. It refers to sex, not gender. I know many women who do not possess a vagina. 2. It sounds very clinical and sterile. It's appropriate for, say, a scientific survey, but not for addressing other humans with the respect they deserve. I don't refer to 'men' as 'males,' either.
    • pifflesnort 13y ago
      > There are two reasons why "female" is problematic: .. Your reply demonstrates some standard rhetorical landmines used by fringe groups: 1) Redefine words within your subculture (in this case: 'gender', 'sex', 'male', and 'female') and then use the new definitions to claim externally inconsiderate use of those words. 2) Assume that whether or not someone was offended ultimately defines ethical norms (especially when tied to #1, redefining vocabulary to create reasons for offense).
      • steveklabnik 13y ago
        I don't care whatsoever about 'offense.' I do care about causing actual harm to human beings. De-humanizing others causes actual harm, through things like wage gaps, (in this case) rape culture, lack of equal rights, etc. 1) There's no 'redefinition' going on here. Sex is a biological thing, a scientific term. If you say "male" and "female," I'd argue you're being a bit clinical, but if you say "man" and "female," you're obviously demonstrating something. It may not be conscious, but you are. 2) You're free to have whatever ethical norms you want, but just like 'free speech,' that doesn't mean you're free from criticism. You can call anyone whatever you like, doesn't mean that I (and others) won't think you're a shitty person, _especially_ after having an explicit conversation about it. "Hey, this thing hurts me." / "I don't care, I can say whatever I want."
        • pifflesnort 13y ago
          > 1) There's no 'redefinition' going on here. "However, Money's meaning of the word [gender] did not become widespread until the 1970s, when feminist theory embraced the distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Today, the distinction is strictly followed in some contexts, especially the social sciences[5][6] and documents written by the World Health Organization (WHO).[4] However, in most other contexts, even in some areas of social sciences, the meaning of gender has undergone a usage shift to include "sex" or even to replace the latter word." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender That's just 'gender' and 'sex'. The first responder proceeded to redefine 'female' and 'male': "Females as a noun is used to refer to lower animals, I believe you mean women." No reputable dictionary or colloquial usage defines 'female' as a noun to refer to "lower animals." > 2) You're free to have whatever ethical norms you want, but just like 'free speech,' that doesn't mean you're free from criticism. You can call anyone whatever you like, doesn't mean that I (and others) won't think you're a shitty person, _especially_ after having an explicit conversation about it. Which one of us gets to tell the other how to behave on the basis of how we feel about it? I find it offensive how you use rhetoric to label those you disagree with as 'shitty' people; it doesn't leave any room for discourse. I'm reminded of the Stephen Fry quote: "It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." Indeed, being offended provides no insight into understanding why you're offended, and without explaining why, there's no basis to make a rational evaluation of whether the behavior that offends you is actually ethically wrong.
• pifflesnort 13y ago
  In a conversation that's already quite likely to run off the rails, playing a one-sided vocabulary shaming game is unlikely to improve the dialogue.
  • bdg 13y ago
    Voidkom's created an account specifically for this thread. Please join me while I ignore the troll. I've already fallen into their trap by responding.
• theorique 13y ago
  "female" -> "female human" -> "woman" Was it really so unclear that you needed a whole scolding comment here?