I am not a native English speaker and I have sometimes referred to people as male and female (as that is what I have been taught) but I have received some backlash in some cases, especially for the word “female”, is there some negative thought in the word which I am unaware of?

I don’t know if this is the best place to ask, if it’s not appropriate I have no problem to delete it ^^

  • TheBananaKing@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Female as an adjective is perfectly fine.

    A female patient, a female politician, a female customer, etc. That’s the best way to refer to those.

    What’s bad is using ‘female’ as a noun: "A female. "

    In general, you just don’t use adjectives-as-nouns to refer to people. You don’t call someone “a gay”, “a black”, or “a Chinese”. That is offensive, and “a female” has the same kind of feel.

    (there are exceptions to the above: you can call someone ‘an American’ or 'A German", but not “A French”. I don’t understand why - if you can’t feel your way, best just avoid it)

    Now, you could get around it by calling someone “a female person” - except that we already have a word for “female person”, and that’s “woman”. And to go out of your way to avoid saying “woman” makes you sound like some kind of incel weirdo, and you don’t want that.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      My wife tells me that using as an adjective is just as bad and that I should always say “woman”, e.g. a woman politician and never a female politician.

      I generally disagree and it seems fine and not disrespectful at all. But it’s somehat less up to me - I’m not a female.

      • investorsexchange@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think that a good rule of thumb is: would you say “male doctor” or “male politician”? If not, is the professional’s gender relevant? Probably not, in which case it sounds pejorative to include it.

        • ripcord@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          In some cases I would, and I would find it awkward to say “man doctor” or “man politician”. I don’t think it works at all, and I disagree with her that this really is the way most people try to avoid the naming.

          But, kinda like pronoun; I guess I try to listen and be sensitive on things like how women and minorities saybtheyre sensitive about, including labels and etc.

      • Kazumara@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        My wife tells me that using as an adjective is just as bad and that I should always say “woman”, e.g. a woman politician and never a female politician.

        Using a noun as an adjective is just weird, honestly.

    • dankm@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Now, you could get around it by calling someone “a female person” - except that we already have a word for “female person”, and that’s “woman”.

      I’m going to nitpick a touch. “Female person” includes girls. “Women” ecludes them.

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      except that we already have a word for “female person”, and that’s “woman”. And to go out of your way to avoid saying “woman” makes you sound like some kind of incel weirdo

      Sounds more like a terf or “gender critical” person, but maybe that’s just my experience.

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          “the suspect is a six foot, white male"

          think that’s because the descriptors come after the noun in reporting

          No they don’t. The word “male” is the noun here.

          Why did people upvote that?

          • Jojo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Because it’s still acting as a descriptor rather than an identifier, despite playing the syntactic role of a noun instead of an adjective. It’s more about semantics in this case than syntax.

              • Jojo@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                I know it’s playing the syntactic role of a noun, that’s what I said. But it’s playing the semantic role of a descriptor. The “thing” being described here is a suspect, one that is white and also male, as opposed to a male who is white and also suspected.

                Syntactically, the word male was a noun. But semantically, it’s still just describing the suspect, rather than identifying the thing to be described.

            • Zagorath@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Both are nouns. Suspect is the subject, male is the object. You could replace it with, for example “the suspect is a cat”, and I think we can all agree “cat” is a noun. “six foot” and “white” are the adjectives in that sentence.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              So you don’t think this argument would hold up if they said “Police are searching for a six foot white male”?

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Well yeah, why would I need a description of your friend unless it pertains to an upcoming story, and why not use his name if you know it? The cop can’t usually say “It was Steve what done it” because most places aren’t Mayberry.

      • Jojo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Because the police never try to dehumanize “suspects” and “perpetrators”.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      And to go out of your way to avoid saying “woman” makes you sound like some kind of incel weirdo, and you don’t want that.

      I’d just like to emphasise this. It’s not that using a different term is intrinsically bad, it’s just that the people who tend to do it are not cool and you don’t want to look like you’re associated with them.

      • Dandroid@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        When I was growing up, saying woman was offensive, because it made people feel old. So we would say “girl”. But now It’s flipped. Saying “girl” makes people feel too young, apparently.

        I’m still kind of adjusting. The word “woman” still feels icky to me because I was berated for saying it as a kid.

          • Pulptastic@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Negative connotations to whom? If those described do not like the term it should not be used. Basic human dignity, just like using one’s preferred pronouns.

        • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          It’s ridiculous that a perfectly fine word is seen as insult used by a certain type of people.

          That’s how association works

          I can have the best and most lasting solution to a problem ever, but my company still won’t allow me to put “THE FINAL SOLUTION” in marketing copy.

          And they shouldn’t.

          • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            The VP of product messaged me a couple weeks ago after some back and forth about some work. She asked if I had some time to talk about the final solution. I went “uhhhh so long as we don’t call it that”

            I’m like 90% sure she had no idea why that phrase is reserved.

          • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            So you say … The word describing a biological fact, and a national socialist euphemism for mass murdering millions of people are the same?

            • vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              So you say … The word describing a biological fact, and a national socialist euphemism for mass murdering millions of people are the same?

              Do you even hear yourself?

              Engage in good faith or sod off.

      • Quastamaza@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Meanwhile, you are perfectly ok with judging someone based uniquely on which term they tend to use? Oh my, mankind is really going down the drain…

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yes. Life is a game of trying to guess which people are full of shit. If they say “feeeemales” and then turn out to be fine, great, I’ll probably give them a heads up not to do that.

          Was there a non-judgmental era I’m unaware of?

        • NιƙƙιDιɱҽʂ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Yes. Language can show what sort of media people consume and the sorts of groups they socialize with, especially when it comes to the internet.

          If someone is using incel language, there will be a strong initial assumption they spend time within incel circles consuming toxic content like Andrew Tate and will remain under that assumption until proven otherwise. Sorry, not sorry?

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

      You can soften “a black” or “a Chinese” entirely by adding “person” to the end of it. English is weird.

    • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Interesting point with adjectives vs nouns.

      ‘a Frenchman’ would be more correct than ‘a French’. Because French is only an adjective, while American and German are both nouns and adjectives. But Frenchman is not gender neutral like German or American.

      Could go with Francophone, but that’s any french speaking person so that includes canadians, africans, etc.

      And, it would seem to make sense to go with Frank, but the Franks were originally germans, then expanded their territory to include France, and the name stuck there but not in their original territory, so is it really correct to refer to the French as Franks? Since no one does it, I would guess not.

      • amelia@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not a native speaker here. Would a French woman also be 'a Frenchman’s and if not, how would you refer to a French woman correctly?

        • pr06lefs@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          “Frenchwoman” perhaps? But that sounds a bit dated to me. I’d probably go with “French person” or “French people”.

        • locuester@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          3 years ago, “man” in that context was considered gender neutral. More recently tho a lot of stink is being made about little language things like this. Theres no replacement word to use.

          • Vanth@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            It’s been a lot longer than 3 years. My city changed policeman and fireman to police officer and firefighter almost two decades ago.

            I am very skeptical of this 3 year timeframe lining up with the end of Trump’s presidency and the right leaning into this anti-woke position.

            • locuester@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Sensitivities during Covid ran high. A lot of things changed then. For instance in the software world removing the name “master” from git usage, and on the TV Show Survivor, the host not saying his famous line “come on in guys”. At the same time pronouns became a huge thing, and these seemingly gender specific or sensitive word terms were targeted.

              You are correct, there was a round of this in the 90s or so, where job titles like “waitress”, “stewardess”, “policeman” were all adjusted. I see that as a very different round of language change.

              • Vanth@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                GitHub changed their terminology in ~2020, but it’s been a controversial term for years before that. I remember master/slave hard drive terminology being set aside in early 2010s. And I was just grunt level, hourly IT at the time.

                • locuester@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  Yeah, 2020 is the time period I’m referring to. I had never heard of it being a thing until George Floyd and BLM movement in 2020, then GitHub changed in response to that.

                  I’ve been in IT for 35 years. And I never heard a single negative thing about branch names and master/slave terminology until 2020.

                  Perhaps you think that was set aside because IDE hard drives are dead.

                  • Vanth@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    It goes even further back than I was aware, to 2003.

                    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3243656.stm

                    My sticking point in your original statement is that all this “sensitivity” is new, allegedly aligning with covid and George Floyd and BLM. That’s not the case and it minimizes the decades of work people have spent trying to influence language to be more inclusive.

                    3 years ago may be when pearl-clutchers started reaching a critical volume to where media saw the dollar signs in catering to them.

          • Jojo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Frenchwoman and Frenchperson are both ridiculous enough to try, but maybe go with Frenchie just to see if they’ll punch you.

    • ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      And that’s why I say “bruh”

      I’m probably the only person to not use that word like a frat douche, I just like calling my guy friends bro and I tried calling my female friends bro and they didn’t find that funny so now everyone gets bruh’d

    • Quastamaza@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Oh dear… And why isn’t “a male” just as bad? And what’s intrinsically wrong about those two as a noun? Why is it ok to call someone “a fire fighter“, “a journalist”, and not “a female”? Is it something to feel shame about? Bah. It’s really beyond me. Thank god i live in Italy, where this kind of stuff still struggles to gain traction, but alas it will do eventually, since hey, you know, we’re all living in america after all. What’s more, it’s not entirely true: now you can get scolded even for using female as an adjective (it happened to me more than once), my friend. And it’ll get worse, just you wait and see.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Typical male behavior!

        There’s no reason for you to feel attacked by the previous sentence, right?

      • TheBananaKing@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        “I had coffee with one of the males at work”

        “There’s a male waiting for you downstairs”

        “I need to see a male about a dog”

        All of them would be weird as fuck, and yes, they’d sound demeaning. They don’t have the same weird-incel vibe, but that’s just an accident of culture.

        • RBWells@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Right. This is the best way to figure out if it sounds weird.

          If you would use “man” then the word to use is “woman”. If you would use “male” then “female”.

          So if someone asks is the doctor male or female? No problem. Even if they ask “is the doctor a male or a female?” Still no problem. Kinda odd but certainly not offensive.

          The problem arises when someone says “men and females” that does sound weird and kinda insulting. As would “women and males”.

          If you would use the word man, use woman.

          If you would use the word male, use female.

      • Kazumara@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        And why isn’t “a male” just as bad?

        It is.

        And what’s intrinsically wrong about those two as a noun?

        Because you’re reducing people to their characteristics of identity.

        Why is it ok to call someone “a fire fighter“, “a journalist”, and not “a female”?

        Because those are characteristics of their chosen functions.

        It seems pretty easy to me, and I’m not even a native speaker.

        • Quastamaza@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          It is.

          Okay, that’s your opinion, not mine. If opinions still exist, that is.

          Because you’re reducing people to their characteristics of identity.

          And having innate characteristics is horrible… unbelievable. I must be really old.

          It seems pretty easy to me, and I’m not even a native speaker.

          Ok, you’re right, you’re reeeally smart. Well done. I quit, have the last say.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      there are exceptions to the above: you can call someone ‘an American’ or 'A German", but not “A French”. I don’t understand why - if you can’t feel your way, best just avoid it

      And yet here you are confidently expounding exactly how this works. Why, if you know you don’t understand, are you weighing in on this like you’re an authority on it?

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Tbh I think it’s just because it sounds bad phonetically, since “a Frenchman” or “an Englishman” are both acceptable as well, but “a French” or “An English” just sounds dumb. Of course you can only do that to white countries, don’t try it with China.

      • Jojo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Because fluent speakers of a language know the rules even if they don’t understand them. Why can you have a big green dog but not a green big dog? Because that’s the way the language works.

        • Zagorath@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          To be slightly more specific, you can have a “green big dog”, but it does not convey the same idea as a “big green dog”. The latter is by far the more normal, and it conveys any dog which is both big and green. The former implies the existence of “big dog” as a specific known thing, like “big dog” is a category of its own more than merely a dog that is big.

          As a general rule though, yes, follow the adjective order guidelines. There’s some fuzziness with it, but “opinion-size-age-shape-colour-origin-material-purpose Noun” should be used.

          • Jojo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah, but if I ask a third grader which way is right, they’ll know and they won’t be able to tell you why. This is normal.

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Unless you’re a ferengi. /s

      I think a big part that’s skeevy to me is that gender and sex are comparatively unimportant individual traits, referring to someone by their gender happens far more often for women and it’s a hold over of misogyny. There are much more interesting individual traits that identify us than our sex or presented gender.

    • Wanderer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Now, you could get around it by calling someone “a female person” - except that we already have a word for “female person”, and that’s “woman”.

      We did have a word that meant that and everyone knew it. But that word has changed into something else.

        • Wanderer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          Female person doesn’t mean women.

          The word has changed so it’s not correct to say that.

          • 🔍🦘🛎@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            Unless you’re someone’s doctor, it’s almost never relevant to discuss someone’s sex. Gender is how we refer to people in most contexts, and when it’s important (e.g. discussing pregnancy) it’s not rude to make a distinction.