I cringe every time I hear another guy refer to women like this

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
172 points
*

It’s fine if it’s consistent imo.

Men and women - 👍

Males and females - 👍

Boys and girls - 👍

Guys and gals - 👍

Men and females - 👎

Men and girls - 👎

Men and chicks - 👎

permalink
report
reply
118 points

Seadogs and wenches - 🏴‍☠️

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

ヾ(⌐■_■)ノ♪

permalink
report
parent
reply
80 points

Comrades - ☭

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

males and females is still psychotic if you’re not specifically talking science like biology, statistics, etc. adjectives as nouns are rarely a good sign in general; it’s almost always derogative.

also boys and girls would be fine except most people who use (or claim to use) boys do it in familiar sense only. they’d never call a 40 year old jacked man they don’t know a boy, but they’d easily call a grown ass woman they don’t know a girl. exceptions are some phrases like “big boy” or “my boy” in endearing sense but that’s not how “girl” is generally used, which is a substitute for “woman”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

A lot of prior military folks will use males and females just because that’s how it’s been drilled into them. Male and female latrines, not men and women’s bathrooms. Male and female barracks, not men and women’s dorms. Male and female standards, etc etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
46 points

dehumanization is part of military. that’s not really an argument for it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

adjectives as nouns are rarely a good sign in general

I don’t think that’s true unless you mean within the context of referring to people or something, e.g. the blacks, the poors. But then stuff like “the rich” and “the unemployed” I don’t really take issue with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

yeah, you’re right but they’re two different cases. notice how when it’s right you don’t pluralize it with an -s because some adjectives have a form of a plural noun, so they don’t have a singular form: “a poor” or “a black” is just yikes. you can find words like “rich” as plural nouns apart from the adjective forms in the dictionary. you might find “female” and “black” as a noun for people too, but they should be marked offensive either directly or in usage notes.

so that’s the distinction. “black” or “female” don’t exist as plural nouns like “the rich” or “the blessed”.

interestingly enough there are exceptions. there is no plural noun “the gay” but “gays” usually isn’t offensive as a noun, but also “a gay” is weird and offensive. language is complicated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

Tamales and females

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points

Guys and Dolls - 👐 (jazz hands)

permalink
report
parent
reply

Men and chicks - 👎

What about “dudes and chicks?”

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Picture you gettin down inside a picture tube.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

“Dudes and dudettes” seems more on the level.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
20 points

dudes and dudettes?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Context is king, so I don’t think this is universal. Decent list though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Chaps and dames

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Bros and broads - 🤔

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

The ONLY time it’s fine is if it’s in a medical report or scientific paper. Written by actual doctors or scientists. And it is done to dehumanize the subject to make it easier for, say, a medical examiner to write a report without breaking down.

Using male and female for people is inheritantly dehumanizing, and that’s only ok in very specific circumstances.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

What’s the male equivalent of Femoids? Is it just Moids?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

I think it unironically would be androids.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Folks 👨‍🌾

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Dicks and chicks. Like the band.

permalink
report
parent
reply