Gender bias in terminology

[JunkMonkey]

English is relatively ungendered for inanimate objects, but many other languages are not.

As far as I know there is only one adjective in English that changes according to gender: blond / blonde.

And ships are always 'she'... and... I'm struggling here.

 

[Swank]

That's what the ' + ' is for.

So I wear a dress for 10 minutes and I should be afforded the legal protections of discriminated groups? I don't think so.

Drag queens are normally understood to be an aspect of gay culture, not a gender or sexuality of its own. Anyone can engage in drag, but some of those people have nothing to fear from bigots.

 

[JunkMonkey]

So I wear a dress for 10 minutes and I should be afforded the legal protections of discriminated groups? I don't think so.

You should be able to wear a dress if you want without being name called or discriminated against - whatever your orientation.

 

[Swank]

You should be able to wear a dress if you want without being name called or discriminated against - whatever your orientation.

Of course. But discrimination alone doesn't put you in that particular grouping any more than your race or medical particulars.

 

[JunkMonkey]

Of course. But discrimination alone doesn't put you in that particular grouping any more than your race or medical particulars.

I really don't understand what you are trying to say here but this isn't really a discussion that fits in the thread (or really the forum).

I will, though, thank you for making me think I should wear my kilt to the Pride march I'm going to next month.

 

[Brian G Turner]

@Swank, *everybody* is supposed to be protected against prejudice - in theory at least. However, if you want to learn more about discrimination and how to deal with it, I'm sure there are other websites out there better suited to explore the subject.

In the meantime, this thread is about gendered language, so let's stick to that instead of general discussion of LGBTQ+ issues. While those are important issues, we are not qualified to discuss them properly here so are to be avoided.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Btw, is it my imagination, or did a woman writer used to be sometimes called an "authoress"?

 

[Toby Frost]

No, that did happen. I've not heard anyone use it for a very long time, though. "Or", "Ess" and "Ette" seemed to be the equivalents of "Mr", "Mrs" and "Miss".

 

[Abernovo]

No, that did happen. I've not heard anyone use it for a very long time, though. "Or", "Ess" and "Ette" seemed to be the equivalents of "Mr", "Mrs" and "Miss".

Also, the suffix 'ix' used to be used, as in 'aviatrix' I've seen Amelia Earhart and Bessie Coleman referred to as such. I'm not sure of how far that suffix goes back though, and get the feeling it may only be an early 20th Century styling, trying to be mock classical.

 

[Swank]

@Swank, *everybody* is supposed to be protected against prejudice - in theory at least. However, if you want to learn more about discrimination and how to deal with it, I'm sure there are other websites out there better suited to explore the subject.

In the meantime, this thread is about gendered language, so let's stick to that instead of general discussion of LGBTQ+ issues. While those are important issues, we are not qualified to discuss them properly here so are to be avoided.

Brian,

I'm responding purely because your posts and others are making me out to be some sort of insensitive jerk.


As I said, everyone does deserve protections from prejudice of any kind. However, LGBTQ+ is not a catch all for any individual that finds themselves being prejudiced against. They have fought long and hard for their particular rights, and I don't think it is respectful to presume that a straight man that wears women's clothing as a job is automatically a member of LGBTQ+ community the moment they receive prejudice.


There are all sorts of reasons people can be the target of prejudice - disability, origin, race, sexuality, caste, job, even personal style. LGBTQ+ isn't the errata category for anyone that isn't already in some other established grouping. And I say that out of an enormous feeling of respect for what LGBTQ+ has done for themselves.

 

[Phyrebrat]

@Swank I don’t think you’re coming across as a jerk at all. But it is an awkward topic simply because of the thin line talking about these things can be — and also I always think face to face is better for these kind of convos so the nuances of delivery etc aren’t missed.

Anyway I know you’re not a jerk from our chats.

 

[AllanR]

Some languages avoid some bias by not putting gender in their pronouns. Hungarian pronouns are én, te, ő and plural mi, ti, ők. The ő is he/she/it, the k, later, signifies the plural case (they).

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

Btw, is it my imagination, or did a woman writer used to be sometimes called an "authoress"?

Oh yes. In fact, it wasn't that long ago (about 30 years) that it was in frequent use in those parts of the SFF community that had a large crossover with fans of Austen etc.—used humorously, of course. It probably wouldn't go over so well now.

 

[Danny McG]

I remember asking (somewhere here on Chrons but I can't find it now) about Mr and Mrs.
Mr is the contracted version of Mister, but what then is Mrs contracted from?

 

[Justin Swanton]

I remember asking (somewhere here on Chrons but I can't find it now) about Mr and Mrs.
Mr is the contracted version of Mister, but what then is Mrs contracted from?

Mistress I believe. Mister comes from master which comes from the Latin magister. I imagine mistress is the old French feminine version of master/mister.

Re the whole topic of gender bias, let me say for the record that it's a pity we can't really discuss it in depth. I keep bumping heads on this and related topics since in South Africa there's less - shall I say - need to worry about what one says. I can say things here that would get me arrested in the UK. Funny old world. And now back to linguistics.

Edit: OK, as Brian Turner pointed out, the topic does stray beyond the remit of the Chrons. In which case it is perhaps a good idea not to discuss it at all, even from the linguistics POV. My 2c.

 

[Phyrebrat]

In which case it is perhaps a good idea not to discuss it at all, even from the linguistics POV. My 2c.

I think we’re okay. Six pages in and no drama — and I think it’s important to get right if we’re writing

 

[Justin Swanton]

I think we’re okay. Six pages in and no drama — and I think it’s important to get right if we’re writing

If we're all on the same page (hey! a pun!). But I'm not. My own take is to just leave language alone. There are some professions that men and women do in exactly the same way, like writing novels, hence deserve the same term. "Authoress" IMHO (needs confirmation like everything else) is a carry over from when it was seen as odd for women to write books and it was assumed they did it differently from men. Once it was realised they didn't then "authoress" naturally fell by the wayside, all on its own. It didn't need pressure from linguistic activists to die.

But there are other professions that men and women do differently, acting being one. Men act as men and women as women (bar contemporary action dramas including SF and fantasy action dramas where women act as ninjas), so the distinguishing terms "actor" and "actress" adequately delineate that fact, without demeaning either men or women. Diversity is enriching and all that?

"Fireman" and "postman" comes from the fact that the vast majority of people who put out fires or deliver letters were - and still are - men. When those professions have a 50/50 mix of men and women then a term to depict both will naturally evolve, all by itself. If people keep calling their dogs away from female posties then they'll stop calling them postmen and think of something else. Actually "postie" should do.

Not sure how close to the barrier this skids so I'll just leave it there.

 

[Toby Frost]

Personally, I rather like the fact that this forum isn't full of people grinding the same boring axes that get ground on the rest of the internet. Usually, the alleged "discussion" boils down to people shouting insults or just saying "The world's gone maaaaad" at each other. As Christine Wheelwright pointed out earlier, there are more pressing global issues.

 

[Justin Swanton]

Personally, I rather like the fact that this forum isn't full of people grinding the same boring axes that get ground on the rest of the internet. Usually, the alleged "discussion" boils down to people shouting insults or just saying "The world's gone maaaaad" at each other. As Christine Wheelwright pointed out earlier, there are more pressing global issues.

And more interesting topics. Like can green energy really work given the huge infrastructure (especially gigantic battery arrays) it will require and why isn't anyone talking about thorium reactors that will solve the energy crisis. But I digress.

 

[Danny McG]

A friend of my son's works at the local hospital, he always categorises himself as a male nurse.

I asked once why he didn't just say a nurse and he told me he then gets lots of dire jokes about saucy uniforms etc from people who think the Carry On franchise is the funniest thing ever.