Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Usage of terms male/female when describing animals

  1. Top | #11
    Super Moderator Bronzeage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    7,171
    Archived
    7,568
    Total Posts
    14,739
    Rep Power
    47
    Fifty years ago, there was a book for children titled "Brain Teasers", basically a book of trick questions.

    One went something like this: A father and son were in a car accident. The father is dead and the boy is severely injured. The boy is rushed to the hospital and a surgeon is called. The surgeon looks at the boy and says, "I can't operate on this patient. He's my son." It's a brain teaser that hasn't aged well, but there was a time when a female surgeon was so rare as to be practically non existent.

    The use of gender neutral terms is like most exercises in political correctness, it's a conscious effort to not be an asshole.

    I remember an anecdote about Walt Disney(maybe true, maybe not). Disney Studios was making an animated short about learning to ride a bike. The narrator says, "When you get on your bicycle.." Walt interrupted and said, "Change that to "a bicycle. Not every child has their own bike." It's a simple thing to care about other people's feelings and not be an asshole about it.

  2. Top | #12
    Mazzie Daius fromderinside's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Local group: Solar system: Earth: NA: US: contiguous states westernmost - IOW here
    Posts
    14,391
    Archived
    18,213
    Total Posts
    32,604
    Rep Power
    64
    Its hard to discuss something only because it's possible to discuss it. Seems that whatever is written is going to offend most - return little for those who see fit to discuss the subject.

    That's why I'm taking a turn at nasty. Especially it will be bad when one applies such terms to those who cannot defend themselves.

  3. Top | #13
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    2,656
    Archived
    7,585
    Total Posts
    10,241
    Rep Power
    73
    Not accounting for every possible permutation doesn’t necessarily make one an asshole. If the narrator were to say “when you walk to the store...” should they be corrected because some people use wheelchairs? If they said “when you see...” or “when you hear...” should they be corrected because some people are blind or deaf?

  4. Top | #14
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, CA
    Posts
    2,833
    Archived
    4,183
    Total Posts
    7,016
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowy Man View Post
    Not accounting for every possible permutation doesn’t necessarily make one an asshole. If the narrator were to say “when you walk to the store...” should they be corrected because some people use wheelchairs? If they said “when you see...” or “when you hear...” should they be corrected because some people are blind or deaf?
    Exactly. I think you generally find that the majority of the people who are supposedly excluded or "oppressed" by a particular choice of words, generally don't really give a flying fuck. It's the far fringe SJWs and attention seekers who are not even affected that seem to be most bothered.

  5. Top | #15
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Whale's Vagina
    Posts
    5,757
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by thebeave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowy Man View Post
    Not accounting for every possible permutation doesn’t necessarily make one an asshole. If the narrator were to say “when you walk to the store...” should they be corrected because some people use wheelchairs? If they said “when you see...” or “when you hear...” should they be corrected because some people are blind or deaf?
    Exactly. I think you generally find that the majority of the people who are supposedly excluded or "oppressed" by a particular choice of words, generally don't really give a flying fuck. It's the far fringe SJWs and attention seekers who are not even affected that seem to be most bothered.
    Note that those examples are talking to a general audience and not addressing any specific person. If you were talking specifically to an individual who couldn't walk and you said "When you walk to the store...?" or "Do you like to go jogging?" it would come off as highly awkward at best. Most of the gendered language issues are around talking to individuals and assuming either their gender and/or only allowing for a binary option. In addition, those types of examples where speech assumes a physical ability come up in conversation about 1/millionth of the time that gender assumptions come up in conversation.

  6. Top | #16
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, CA
    Posts
    2,833
    Archived
    4,183
    Total Posts
    7,016
    Rep Power
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by thebeave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowy Man View Post
    Not accounting for every possible permutation doesn’t necessarily make one an asshole. If the narrator were to say “when you walk to the store...” should they be corrected because some people use wheelchairs? If they said “when you see...” or “when you hear...” should they be corrected because some people are blind or deaf?
    Exactly. I think you generally find that the majority of the people who are supposedly excluded or "oppressed" by a particular choice of words, generally don't really give a flying fuck. It's the far fringe SJWs and attention seekers who are not even affected that seem to be most bothered.
    Note that those examples are talking to a general audience and not addressing any specific person. If you were talking specifically to an individual who couldn't walk and you said "When you walk to the store...?" or "Do you like to go jogging?" it would come off as highly awkward at best. Most of the gendered language issues are around talking to individuals and assuming either their gender and/or only allowing for a binary option. In addition, those types of examples where speech assumes a physical ability come up in conversation about 1/millionth of the time that gender assumptions come up in conversation.
    Well, even when we try our best, we're never going to make all of the people happy all of the time when it comes to words and language. If I were to start using "them" (or xir or xe) instead of "he" or "she" in my everyday conversation with random strangers, I can pretty much guarantee I would do nothing but create awkwardness, confusion and annoyance far more than if I just stuck with the old standby terms. And this is coming from someone living in the SF Bay Area, which has a huge LGBT presence. But the fact is, with the vast majority of people, their gender is also their biological sex. I do, however, sometimes come across androgynous people working in retail, and I make a point to be my normal friendly self and just avoid any mention of gender or sex. Its not that hard.

  7. Top | #17
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Whale's Vagina
    Posts
    5,757
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by thebeave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post

    Note that those examples are talking to a general audience and not addressing any specific person. If you were talking specifically to an individual who couldn't walk and you said "When you walk to the store...?" or "Do you like to go jogging?" it would come off as highly awkward at best. Most of the gendered language issues are around talking to individuals and assuming either their gender and/or only allowing for a binary option. In addition, those types of examples where speech assumes a physical ability come up in conversation about 1/millionth of the time that gender assumptions come up in conversation.
    Well, even when we try our best, we're never going to make all of the people happy all of the time when it comes to words and language. If I were to start using "them" (or xir or xe) instead of "he" or "she" in my everyday conversation with random strangers, I can pretty much guarantee I would do nothing but create awkwardness, confusion and annoyance far more than if I just stuck with the old standby terms. And this is coming from someone living in the SF Bay Area, which has a huge LGBT presence. But the fact is, with the vast majority of people, their gender is also their biological sex. I do, however, sometimes come across androgynous people working in retail, and I make a point to be my normal friendly self and just avoid any mention of gender or sex. Its not that hard.
    A lot of conservatives seem to find it extremely hard to avoid using gendered terms even when there are indicators they may be inappropriate, so much so that many conservatives feel compelled to misgender a person even after the person has explicitly told them their gender. Then they like to pretend they are just being scientifically accurate, proving that they scientifically illiterate in addition to being a hateful bigot who gets joy hurting others.

  8. Top | #18
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    USA, California
    Posts
    3,951
    Archived
    5,710
    Total Posts
    9,661
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by thebeave View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowy Man View Post
    Not accounting for every possible permutation doesn’t necessarily make one an asshole. If the narrator were to say “when you walk to the store...” should they be corrected because some people use wheelchairs? If they said “when you see...” or “when you hear...” should they be corrected because some people are blind or deaf?
    Exactly. I think you generally find that the majority of the people who are supposedly excluded or "oppressed" by a particular choice of words, generally don't really give a flying fuck. It's the far fringe SJWs and attention seekers who are not even affected that seem to be most bothered.
    Note that those examples are talking to a general audience and not addressing any specific person. If you were talking specifically to an individual who couldn't walk and you said "When you walk to the store...?" or "Do you like to go jogging?" it would come off as highly awkward at best. Most of the gendered language issues are around talking to individuals and assuming either their gender and/or only allowing for a binary option. In addition, those types of examples where speech assumes a physical ability come up in conversation about 1/millionth of the time that gender assumptions come up in conversation.
    Um, no not really. Here's an example, the term Latinx.

  9. Top | #19
    Super Moderator Bronzeage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Deep South
    Posts
    7,171
    Archived
    7,568
    Total Posts
    14,739
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowy Man View Post
    Not accounting for every possible permutation doesn’t necessarily make one an asshole. If the narrator were to say “when you walk to the store...” should they be corrected because some people use wheelchairs? If they said “when you see...” or “when you hear...” should they be corrected because some people are blind or deaf?
    I guess that depends upon whether there are paraplegics, the blind, or the deaf, in your audience. If you don't have to confront the people you offend, it's no harm, no foul.

  10. Top | #20
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Whale's Vagina
    Posts
    5,757
    Rep Power
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by J842P View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ronburgundy View Post

    Note that those examples are talking to a general audience and not addressing any specific person. If you were talking specifically to an individual who couldn't walk and you said "When you walk to the store...?" or "Do you like to go jogging?" it would come off as highly awkward at best. Most of the gendered language issues are around talking to individuals and assuming either their gender and/or only allowing for a binary option. In addition, those types of examples where speech assumes a physical ability come up in conversation about 1/millionth of the time that gender assumptions come up in conversation.
    Um, no not really. Here's an example, the term Latinx.
    Except there you don't have to make any decision or know anything about the audience, you're just using a gender neutral term as the default, instead of default term that is needlessly gendered to being with. In fact, in 99% of situations it saves you from have to say "Latinos Y Lantinas".

    Only a fragile snowflake who always needs to be a sexist bigot would give a flying fuck about replacing the masculine default of latino with a neutral default of latinX, especially since nearly everyone complaining doesn't know Spanish in the first place (or any foreign language).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •