Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Look out ...
... here come the female chauvinist pigs. (Hat tip again to Vikram Johri, who notes that a "sexual revolution that glamourizes pornography and raunch, in fact, belittles the ideals of feminism since it celebrates what is ultimately an exhibitionist view of women." As Glenn Reynolds might say: Indeed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have been receiving emails from a US academic at work becuase we published some letters with the title "Women editors" He said that his female colleagues regarded this as demeaning, and we should have used the term "Female".
ReplyDeleteI had never thought that "women" was a demeaning term cf "female" -- this man said it was a US/UK thing.
Any views, anyone?
My colleague, Tanya Barrientos, as liberated a woman as I know, thinks "female" sounds as if you're talking about an animal.
ReplyDeleteI totally understand what your colleague means, Frank. In college circles in Delhi, "female" is used to mark a gender distinction between acquaintances and strangers, like "I dont think I know that female," or even to pull someone down, as in "that female has the worst dress sense ever!" Somehow, you don't find "woman" or "lady" being used in such statements, as if there were a hidden mark of respect attached to these terms.
ReplyDeleteThanks, everyone, for a US view. The OED lists "woman" as an accepted usage adjectivally, which is the dictionary we use for our journal style, but the accusation made against us is that it is a "British" usage. So it is good to get this feedback, especially the good old Chicago Manual of Style! (Thanks, Dave.)
ReplyDelete