• JojoWakaki@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Cool it over there. I look like that but I don’t call women females. That was very unwarranted.

  • ...m...@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    …it’s how you imagine people look or it’s what you imagine people look like, but not both…

  • tehn00bi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    What the guys behind closed doors at the Republican Party leadership look like when they take their mask off.

  • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Honest question from a non native: what is wrong with the term female?

    And what word could you use for the sex girls and women are part of where people wouldn’t imagine you look like a space neolib?

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Female is still an acceptable term in some context: eg, when referring to the social group on a societal level, female can be fine, also for identifying someone’s genetic/biological sex as “female” for medical/official contexts, that’s still okay in most cases.

      Where it’s not okay is to use it on an individual level or to refer to a small group of ladies. The term is seem as cold, clinical, and in some cases, dehumanizing. It comes off as boiling down a person to their function in reproduction and nothing more. “You are the female and you carry children.” Kind of thing. Like women are some kind of bakery for your crotch goblins, and not people worthy of respect.

      But something like “the female population of the country” is fairly okay, since you’re referring to the entirely of the people who identify as female, not an individual or small group of individuals.

      At least, that’s my take. I’m just some guy. If any women want to correct me, I defer to your judgement and opinion, and happily retract any contradictory statements I may have made. I am always happy to be corrected.

      • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Okay I understand.

        So “books with female protagonists” would be okay (because large group referenced) “Bus with female passengers” would be considered rude, because small group referenced, you would rather say “Bus with women and girls as passengers” ?

    • MECHAGODZILLA2@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’ll be real here: no one irl cares, we’re so careless with our language people understand what you mean more by vibes than vocabulary. I’ve not heard a single person take umbrage with female outside of the internet.

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Short answer: It’s a turn of phrase the Incel movement popularized as a dehumanizing dogwhistle.

      Long answer: In current American English, “Female” and “Females” are highly formal terms and really are only commonly used in situations like law and academic discourse (this is true of “male” and “males” as well, though there’s much less cultural baggage associated with those terms). People who use them in casual conversation instead of the much more common “Women” (or the diminutive, “Girls”) tend to be the kind of person that uses formal language to emphasize their own intellectual superiority over the common masses, and in particular all the women who won’t have sex with them. In fact and almost invariably, this is presented in the form of explanations about why nobody wants to have sex with them, and the cultural forces that are causing it, and why deep down it’s the women’s fault they can’t get a date, and it just all goes downhill from there.

      edit: clarity

    • xx3rawr@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Non-native as well but for me, “female” is an adjective and only used as a noun in technical setting. If used in regular conversation setting, it’s condescending and dehumanizing.

      Good:

      • There are fifteen females in the survey.
      • The female is more aggressive, typical of hyenas.
      • You bought the wrong USB cable, this one is a female.

      Bad:

      • This female is not very good at her job.
      • You females need to tone it down.
      • andros_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        True. It’s just a slogan in the same way that “being White is all right” is or “All Lives Matter” is. It’s not supposed to mean what it means. It’s a code.

        Like - once, 4chan (/pol/ and /b/ primarily, early mid 2010s) that it would be funny to make drinking milk a racist thing. It was explicitly discussed how this would make people upset about people drinking milk, and how this would be funny. The alt right weirdos in on the joke get the joke, leftists are befuddled and outraged, the stupid conservative weirdos are laughing at the dumb liberals and their cancel culture getting worked up about milk. Same thing with that pinched thumb and index finger “okay” symbol. 14 and 88 have lost their plausible deniability in most spaces at least.

        Very similarly, the idea of MAPS was a /pol/ operation that was carried out to delegitimize the LGBT movement. The idea of people identifying with a sexual orientation based on being exclusively attracted to children, to the point of creating a pride flag, was mostly a /pol/ op. This is not to say that there aren’t creeps who did actually identify as such as a consequence of this movement, but it wasn’t a natural movement of creeps.

        Language games. The limits of my language are the limits of my world. The means something entirely different even in just human there.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Obviously the exclusionary group is going to exclude the people they don’t like with their slogans though. Trans exclusionary radical feminists don’t believe trans women are women. The “adult human female” shit across from them “defining woman” or something to that effect.

        • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I know, but I used to really piss off transphobes with that line. At least one immediately quote retweeted me, while calling me out as an “extreme misogynist” (she was defending Matt Walsh of all people, saying he’s just practicing his “right to religion”) just before blocking me.

          • WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Funny how trans people never have religious rights in these discussions. Or how they refer to “trans ideology” rather than trans religious or philosophical beliefs. If I were to opine on my beliefs of the soul/spirit, I would say I was created with a female spirit in a male body. If I have any religious belief, then it is a religious worldview where such a thing is possible. Yet trans people never seem to have their religious rights acknowledged.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes that’s the issue, if you use them inconsistently. Males, females. Men, women. Same for boys, girls actually. Saying boys and women or men and girls can seem belittling to the other.

      • Ziglin (it/they)@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I consistently used males and females in some contexts but I’ve noticed that it often still comes across as weird when talking about humanoids.

  • Depress_Mode@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    No stupid questions time: This kind of lurks in the back of my mind and I sometimes find myself hesitating to use the term “female” to refer to female figures in any context. I don’t have to do that, right? Like, would “woman lawyer” be better than “female lawyer” in contexts where specifying gender might be relevant? I would conversely prefer the term “male lawyer” in the same context and “man lawyer” sounds just as odd to me as “woman lawyer”. Am I overthinking this?

    • surewhynotlem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      They’re just called lawyers, unless they’re lawyering with their genitals and their sex is somehow relevant.

    • hangry@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      My personal take is to just use lawyer, when gender is irrelevant. This may get your audience confused when using “she” in the next sentence. But it could help weaken the stereotypes about genders if we did this more often IMHO.
      If needed “female lawyer” or “lawyer who is a woman” are good otherwise.

      • Depress_Mode@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        From what I googled, it’s especially bad when you pair “man” and “female” together, which makes sense to me.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Just don’t use male or female as nouns to refer to humans. That simple. If you’re talking about animals it doesn’t matter.

          • skisnow@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you’re talking about animals it doesn’t matter.

            Not even that it doesn’t matter, it’s almost entirely the point. The reason why using ‘females’ as a noun to refer to women is dehumanizing is because it’s a noun we use for animals.

    • MisterMoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sorry but “woman” is not an adjective and its use that way is grating. You wouldn’t say “man teacher” and it sounds wrong. So does “woman lawyer” or “woman voter.”

      The neckbeard/incel thing is using “female” when “woman” would be acceptable and more common, like “look at these females” or something. It doesn’t mean we have to abolish the word “female” entirely from the lexicon.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I work in statistics and we never use girl of woman, only female. The line is vastly different in age and meaning depending on culture, religion, law, or heritage. Even in western societ, 13, 16, 18, and 21 are all valid before tipping to 40, 50, 60, 65, 68, and 70 where the term can be prefixed with some form of adjective.

      It’s old-fashioned. Just say female and every culture/society understands you without confusion or insult. Save you embarassing/insulting people while travelling too.

    • InputZero@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes you’re over thinking this. A woman lawyer is just a lawyer. Same how a male lawyer is just a lawyer. Unless the gender of the person is important, leave it out of their job title. Use the word actor to describe both men and women who act. Flight attendant for men and women, or receptionist, or any other word. The vast majority of time you can leave their gender out of the description and it’s fine.