Let me throw it out there: For a while, it was generally acknowledged, at least among centre-left people of at least moderate feminist awareness, that to call a grown woman a "girl" was demeaning. And potentially insulting.

I remember being infuriated in the late eighties when, briefly, I was working in an graphics department -- almost all female -- and the hotshot young salesmen -- yes, all male -- would come in and say "hi girls, just dropping this off for you, get on it, would you?"

Particularly because the head of the graphics department was an older woman of great strength and character, but alas without a lot of job security. No union, another topic for another day.

I left the workforce to return to the womb of the ivory tower (to mix a metaphor), where no one at the time would have considered referring to women as girls. Just wasn't done, except maybe as a joke (or to push my buttons, I've been known to have a shortish fuse!).

But now, everywhere I go, it's girls, girls, girls.

And people look at me blankly or roll their eyes when I bring it up. "But I call men guys, or boys, so what's the big deal?"

Sigh.

So: thoughts from babblers, please? Should I just shrug my shoulders and let it go? I wouldn't be so worried, except that I see us creeping backwards on women's rights all over the place, and I think sometimes treating symptoms can help with curing the disease.

I do think language is important. And what you call people tends to demonstrate how you think of them. I certainly don't think this is the be-all and end-all of the feminist movement, but it's like constantly being bitten by gnats.

My friend has suggested that some women might be offended by the term, because it has a basis in patriarchy (back in the days when ladies did and did not do certain things, and had to act properly, and not speak out of turn, etc.). I have been arguing that it seems like such an innocuous term that I don't really see how it could be genuinely offensive, and that I tend to use it in a tongue-in-cheek way anyhow.

I do hear what you're saying about "girls"; it does come across as demeaning, especially in the contexts you mentioned.

Personally I have no problem with it - I'm not a huge fan of the cutesy spelling sometimes but I figure to each her own right?

I liked ephemeral's post about the background, on the other thread.

(edit: props to me, the link actually works! )

[ 17 August 2005: Message edited by: Nikita ]

quote:

---

I do hear what you're saying about "girls"; it does come across as demeaning, especially in the contexts you mentioned.

I think if I was talking about ladies and somebody said "hey, don't say lady, because it's offensive" I would stop saying lady, at least around them. But there are some terms which, I believe, can be alright if the context is appropriate.

---

quote:

---

I remember being infuriated in the late eighties when, briefly, I was working in an graphics department -- almost all female -- and the hotshot young salesmen -- yes, all male -- would come in and say "hi girls, just dropping this off for you, get on it, would you?"
[/QB]

---

While the above case is illustrating an environment in which the blunt specification of gender difference itself is inherently kind of grating in the casual address (I think it would be no matter what the term used was), it's clear that address specifying gender is pretty fundamentally inextricable from language, or at least Indo-European language, so, in search of the ideal term...

The problem is perhaps that there is no amiable, casual gender-specific form of address for women other than 'girls'. 'Girls' fills the place of both 'guys' and 'boys' as you point out, being the two amiable, casual gender specific forms of address for men, both exceedingly common.

I mean, "hi, women" sounds so outlandish as to be pretty much an unavailable possibility, so it's unsurprising that 'girls' would be the favoured choice.

quote:

---

I mean, "hi, women" sounds so outlandish as to be pretty much an unavailable possibility, so it's unsurprising that 'girls' would be the favoured choice.

But simply wishing that no form of gender specific address whatsoever persist seems hopeless. It just won't happen. Gender is far too useful a category, given virtually everyone has it, for it ever to disappear from the available selection of forms of casual address, I think. So if what one is looking for is a casual, amiable form of address which specifies gender, one is stuck with choosing a 'girls' I suppose.

---

The rule, as usual, is it depends on who's saying it and to whom. My brother says "girls" in a way that makes my wife and I grit our teeth (because he's a sexist pig and clearly means girls as in little girls, not to be taken seriously). My brother-in-law, on the other hand, could say "chicks" and make it work (because his attitude is very right, he's just politically incorrect - on purpose, I suspect).

Because of this, I always find myself running into a problem over gender-specific words. I try to be as polite as possible, and so for males I generally say something to the effect of, "Are you free to help this gentleman?" But for women, I always find myself tongue-tied. Saying, "Are you free to help this woman?" seems to me to be far too impersonal, far too impolite and fairly objectifying, especially when, as i've said, they're standing right in front of me. I wouldn't say, "Could you help this man?" I suppose "Lady" is a fallback, but even that seems improper, given the "ladies do this and don't do that" connotation.

Whenever possible I try to use the person's name, like, "Are you free to help Ms./Mrs./Miss X." But even that runs into problems because it's impossible to know whether someone I (usually) don't know would prefer to be called "Ms" or "Mrs" or "Miss" or what have you. Men are "Mr", which is nice and simple.

I think what I'm trying to say is that there are far too many nuances to the various terms given to women that don't exist for men. Almost any man can be described as "gentleman" and no one would bat an eye or even notice. You'd be hard-pressed to offend a man by referring to him as "gentleman". But it seems that almost every word for women carries with it some kind of baggage or inferred meaning beyond the person to whom it actually refers. It bothers me that pretty much any man can be referred to objectively with a single pronoun, but we have so many different ones for women with so many different implied meanings.

As for the term 'lady' I don't have a huge problem with it, but tend to associate it not so much with the strict social norms of the victorian era and beyond so much as with some dumbass twenty-something with his head out the window of his best buddy's car yelling "Hey ladieeees!" Images of chivalry figure in pickup lines more often than one might expect.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NWOntarian:

Whenever possible I try to use the person's name, like, "Are you free to help Ms./Mrs./Miss X." But even that runs into problems because it's impossible to know whether someone I (usually) don't know would prefer to be called "Ms" or "Mrs" or "Miss" or what have you. Men are "Mr", which is nice and simple.

---

The gender based issue is that raised by Yst, how the only casual term for women is "girls". As everyday language has become ever more casual, the term "girls" has become increasingly applied to adult females. It works against the advances that the women's movement made against sexist language and behaviour.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Papal Bull:

I find using the term "the girls" or "the boys" is used to refer to specific close gender groups of friends as a whole rather than being used as a demeaning insult.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NWOntarian:
Where I work, I often find myself having to say things like, "Are you free to help this *blank*?" or "This *blank* requires whatever." while the person I'm referring to is standing right in front of me.

Because of this, I always find myself running into a problem over gender-specific words. I try to be as polite as possible, and so for males I generally say something to the effect of, "Are you free to help this gentleman?" But for women, I always find myself tongue-tied. Saying, "Are you free to help this woman?"

---

I don't know the details of where you work, but couldn't you say something like "Are you free to help our customer/client/visitor?"

Whereas, girl has many negative conotations such as ... throw like a girl, cry/screan like a girl, run away like a girl, hit like a girl, all indicating inability or deficiency .

So as adult 'girls' we feel insulted and upset when the term is used to describe us.

Boomer women of at least the older decade (now in their fifties) were the women to whom women became the de rigueur reference for a time. When I'm writing formally or speaking of anyone I don't know personally, I would always refer to a woman or women, and for me, that applies to anyone who is past puberty: a 14-yr-old is a "young woman." Punckt.

It seems to me lately that it is younger people who can't quite believe that us old girls are exactly women any longer. No, they don't say "old girls" -- but I hear a lot about "old ladies," which is an expression that carries a lot of dismissive baggage, IMHO.

I'm with RB on the topic of a commercial/professional exchange. As you say, NWO, "Could you help this woman?" still sounds a little, ah, brutal -- I wonder why? But lady in that context makes me cringe because it reminds me of the icky bourgeois proprieties that we have all had to observe in shops for so long. It feels outdated and phoney -- I like RB's solutions much better.

All that sniffy PC stuff aside, I often refer to friends as girls or grils or guys or even chicks if we're all joking together and if I know that no one objects. I do know women who really won't stand for chicks, especially, in any context, even though it seems such a fond term to me ... when I use it.

The grils thing on babble is a long story. It comes from an old Reader's Digest joke about a misspelling in some grafitti. 'lance decided that if the girls could invent a babble-specific term for selves (grils), then the guys could also be gyus, so you will notice those two terms popping up sometimes.

And yes, Ms. has always left me cold, although I kind of like grrl -- dunno why. Opinions differ on those two.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Boomer women of at least the older decade (now in their fifties) were the women to whom women became the de rigueur reference for a time. When I'm writing formally or speaking of anyone I don't know personally, I would always refer to a woman or women, and for me, that applies to anyone who is past puberty: a 14-yr-old is a "young woman." Punckt.
_______________________________________
All that sniffy PC stuff aside, I often refer to friends as girls or grils or guys or even chicks if we're all joking together and if I know that no one objects. I do know women who really won't stand for chicks, especially, in any context, even though it seems such a fond term to me ... when I use it.

_______________________________________________
And yes, Ms. has always left me cold, although I kind of like grrl -- dunno why. Opinions differ on those two.

Most of all, though, I like to be called skdadl.

---

As one of those "boomer" women, I agree. Well put, skdadl.

My comfort level with the use of "girls" among my friends came several time ago in a conversation with an African American [that's a whole other topic] female colleague. Her take, which I like then & still do, is that the use of the word "girls" among ourselves, to refer to friends & family, is fine because we use it in love with each other. When it comes from the mouth of a male, intended as a put down, it's just vile. But when we use it among ourselves, we assert control. It is like black people, she said, who use the "n" word away from white people, to refer to each other & gay people who are taking back the "q" word to use for positive self identification.

Language is dynamic. The struugles with these words are signs of linguistic vitality.

Yes, I'm quite aware that a lot of language use is contextual; I've been known to swear a blue streak but I try not to do it at work! But it also very much reflects our values. We've all had the experience of being trapped at a dinner with some boor who persists in, for example, making racial or ethnic stereotypes. We have had to make the decision about whether or not to speak up, and how to do it. We encourage each other to challenge that type of language use and attitude when we encounter it.

Why don't we do this for women?

I relate this to the situation I described over on another thread, which is when university students are referred to as "kids" by faculty/staff. While this might come across as affectionate, it can also have a marginalizing effect; it says that students are not full members of the community -- even though students have struggled for years to be included in decision-making -- and is reminiscent of the in loco parentis approach to students that went out in the sixties. And yes, some people don't feel this is important, but to me it reflects an attitude, and creates a certain climate.

For me, referring to women as "girls" is not something that is just contextual, it also has a lot to do with how women are regarded in society. Could be just my generation (although I'm not quite a boomer; thanks for the post skdadl!), but if that's so, why has it changed back?

N.B. In terms of collective nouns & personal address:

-- Hi everyone! Hi folks! Hey all! Yo!

-- Could you please help this client/customer; or even better, to the woman, "X-person-who-works-here will be right with you." (Then you get to be polite to them directly!)

Why do we need to use gender to identify a person, or a group of people, any more than any other distinguishing characteristic?

[edit to add: Just realized RealityBites' post above had the customer/client advice, thanks!]

[ 18 August 2005: Message edited by: Tehanu ]

quote:

---

if that's so, why has it changed back?

---

Tehanu, I sit to be corrected and I don't want to put words in anyone else's mouth, but I have the impression that many younger women feel or felt that the so-called second wavers (like me) forgot one thing in our women's lib campaigns: sexiness.

They wanted to emphasize that women can struggle for equality but be sexy at the same time. I guess they found us a bit grim.

And, I mean, I will admit to having had some grim periods.

Anyway, one way to lighten the movement up, I guess, was to play games with the word "girl," especially turning it into "grrl," which is both playful and fierce at the same time. Or at least that was the theory?

I mean, I can see that. I guess.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
I guess the larger question for me is related to what I see as feminism getting short shrift in general. Can anyone think of another marginalized group, that when even some members of the group said they felt a term used to describe them was demeaning, we would be continuing to use the term, regardless of context?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
I was working in a graphics department -- almost all female -- and the hotshot young salesmen -- yes, all male -- would come in and say "hi girls . .'

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yst:
there is no amiable, casual gender-specific form of address for women other than 'girls'. 'Girls' fills the place of both 'guys' and 'boys'. . Gender is far too useful a category, given virtually everyone has it, for it ever to disappear from the available selection of forms of casual address.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NWOntarian:
I try to use the person's name, like, "Are you free to help Ms./Mrs./Miss X." But even that runs into problems because it's impossible to know whether someone I (usually) don't know would prefer to be called "Ms" or "Mrs" or "Miss" or what have you. Men are "Mr", which is nice and simple.

---

Jane Smith
Joe Smith
111 Main Street

And if I call her "Jane" I try to call him "Joe."

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
women can struggle for equality but be sexy at the same time.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by NWOntarian:
You'd be hard-pressed to offend a man by referring to him as "gentleman".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MyNameisLeo:
Is society due for the re-introduction of "gentlewomen"?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
... I have the impression that many younger women feel or felt that the so-called second wavers (like me) forgot one thing in our women's lib campaigns: sexiness.

I still think that I was quite sexy enough.

---

WAS? I'm sure you still are

Grimness, yes, well, there is that. Part of me really wants to yell out that yes! We do need to be grim again!!! Look at the world!!!

Can we be sexy without referring to ourselves by a word that implies we're children? 'Cause that could be seen to be a teeny bit creepy ...

Sexy words for women ... hmmmm ... [sorry, mind drifted]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
And people look at me blankly or roll their eyes when I bring it up. "But I call men guys, or boys, so what's the big deal?"

Sigh.

---

Sigh what?

What IS the big deal?

quote:

---

It's a sign of familiarity, not diminution. Deal with it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MyNameisLeo:
Certainly there's baggage. Look at the different connotations of spinster and bachelor, yet they are equal terms. Is society due for the re-introduction of "gentlewomen"? I just don't like the word "Ms" - the sound of it. Also, I find some women (usually middle-aged or older) correct me to "Mrs." Perhaps we need 3 categories for men, too? Master, Mister and a 3rd label representing unmarried, undefined and married, respectively. As for "young woman" and "young man" when I use these I mean them as complimentary. As for "kids," my parents call anyone under 50 a "kid" so it's never really grated. It was a gradual process, naturally, it used to be anyone under 40, etc.

---

quote:

---

And yes, Ms. has always left me cold, although I kind of like grrl -- dunno why. Opinions differ on those two.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nikita:

skdadl, I'm the exact opposite: I'd much rather be called Ms. than Miss. Miss reminds me of an uptight old spinster like Aunt Hetty (Road to Avonlea, anyone?). Ms. sounds cool and sophisticated and sexy, which are qualities to which I aspire!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
As you say, NWO, "Could you help this woman?" still sounds a little, ah, brutal -- I wonder why?

---

Perhaps it sounds uncomfortably close to the wedding ceremony question, "Do you take this woman...?)

When it comes to issues of PC language I think that sometimes —please note the use of the word sometimes —it is important to take a step back, look at the situation and gain some perspective.

Insult, dismissiveness or condescension is not always what is at play. Sometimes a person is using a word innocently, descriptively. I think that an intelligent, thinking person has some responsibility to consider that and to, when appropriate, not always take offense.

If malice is not intended, don’t find any.

And if malice is intended...

Then by all means take offense. Fight back. Hold the individual responsible. But even then it’s not the word you are taking offense to, is it? It’s the attitude.

I realize this isn’t about men, but the following is useful as a comparison:

It has been pointed out that men do not take offense to the term “boys” and in fact will generally find positive meaning in being described as such.

Sure. Sometimes. Again, context.

In a group setting being one of “the boys” is a positive thing. It implies belonging. However, “photocopy this, boy,” or “pour me a drink, boy” would be every bit as insulting as the equivalent expression with the word “girl” substituted for “boy.”

When I worked in customer service, I had terms like “bud,” “champ,” or “sport” used dismissively towards me all the time—usually by men, sometimes by women. If the situation warranted it, I would occasionally ask that I be treated with a greater degree or respect (although, to be fair, I’d usually just bite my tongue and provided them with truly terrible service out of spite).

In those cases, it wasn’t the word “bud” that I took offense to. It was the underlining meaning.

Lastly, have I mentioned the importance of context?

[ 18 August 2005: Message edited by: dgrollins ]

quote:

---

I'm not a violent person and I don't condone hitting, but the first person who calls me "gentlewoman" will definitely get a smack.

---

There would be a certain delicious irony, I think, to that. Anyway, I retract my suggestion.

As for Fat Pride (and I believe there actually is such a thing), this is quite a loaded and painful issue in my house. My wife is beautiful and, yes, fat (her word). We know from personal and painful experience, that the [i]only[i] way she can attain the "right" weight is to starve herself. She actually did do this during her teens. Despite being very athletic and very healthy, she is still subjected to harrassment to a really quite shocking degree.

I love Seinfeld too.

And, as for your reaction to "bud," "champ," etc., never underestimate spite. It's a good thing, just use it sparingly to keep it delicious.

[ 18 August 2005: Message edited by: MyNameisLeo ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by andrean:

Except when it's not. And that's exactly what this discussion is attempting to deal with.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pebbles:

What IS the big deal?

It's a sign of familiarity, not diminution. Deal with it.

and

The initial example is familiarity.

---

Are you referring to my example of the salespeople and the art department? Because, as the person who was there, I can assure you that nobody felt that it was warm and fuzzy and friendly.

These were younger men (well, not younger than me, I was pretty young back then!), paid considerably more, who treated the women in the department as servants. And there are plenty of other office environments where that still goes on.

Maybe to you that constitutes familiarity?

quote:

---

Originally posted by dgrollins:
Insult, dismissiveness or condescension is not always what is at play. Sometimes a person is using a word innocently, descriptively. I think that an intelligent, thinking person has some responsibility to consider that and to, when appropriate, not always take offense.

If malice is not intended, don’t find any.

---

Just in case anyone's wondering I don't spend all day muttering "woman not girl" as I stomp down the street, scowling at anyone playing pop rock or Cindi Lauper, looking grim, grim, grim

quote:

---

In a group setting being one of “the boys” is a positive thing. It implies belonging. However, “photocopy this, boy,” or “pour me a drink, boy” would be every bit as insulting as the equivalent expression with the word “girl” substituted for “boy.”

---

I'm another one of those people who calls nearly everyone 'kid', calls university 'school', and if they don't mind, calls my professors by their first names (many actually prefer it in my department). I find that the level of formality imposed on learning to be distracting, so I do away with it as much as I can, although that seems to become a distraction to other students sometimes, it seems.

As far as titles/prefixes go, I definitly prefer Miss to Ms. Don't know why, but if I have to assign myself a title, I'd take Miss, although I prefer nothing at all, just my first name. Maybe part of me is reacting to growing up on a military base

After reading the above posts about how we connect ourselves so intimately with words and language, I feel so proud to have been born in this particular gender.

From boss to worker, unless it's a very friendly relationship, I would venture that it rarely feels okay for the woman worker.

To be funny and/or silly I call some women who I know very well "chick". Once a friend of mine overheard me saying to my mom "Chill, chick!" and was horrified at my manners until I told her that we talk like that for fun sometimes.

[drift]
I call my breasts "the girls" as in "I hate underwire bras, they squish the girls too much."
[end drift]

I was called "young lady" for a lot of my life, well into my 20s. I hated that!! I didn't think anything like that would bug me more until the first time I was called "ma'am". Now THAT made me realllly mad. I ain't no "ma'am"!

I use "Ms." on all official documents asking for such types of designations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Debra:
Is it possible that men don't have a problem being called 'boys' because there is already a certain respect for being a boy?

Whereas, girl has many negative conotations such as ... throw like a girl, cry/screan like a girl, run away like a girl, hit like a girl, all indicating inability or deficiency .

---

"Well, I am a girl, so what's your point?" has always been my preferred come back along with a pointed look.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NWOntarian:
Where I work, I often find myself having to say things like, "Are you free to help this *blank*?" or "This *blank* requires whatever." while the person I'm referring to is standing right in front of me.

(snipps)

---

Try recasting it in terms of the role the person is filling, rather than the sex of the person. As:
Are you free to help this customer?
Are you free to help this client?

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:

All that sniffy PC stuff aside, I often refer to friends as girls or grils or guys or even chicks if we're all joking together and if I know that no one objects. I do know women who really won't stand for chicks, especially, in any context, even though it seems such a fond term to me ... when I use it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Debra:
Is it possible that men don't have a problem being called 'boys' because there is already a certain respect for being a boy?

Whereas, girl has many negative conotations such as ... throw like a girl, cry/screan like a girl, run away like a girl, hit like a girl, all indicating inability or deficiency .

So as adult 'girls' we feel insulted and upset when the term is used to describe us.

I wonder if we aren't doing our young girls a disservice though by agreeing there is negativety associated with being a girl?

---

Boy is often used in a misandristic context as well, as in boys with their toys, thus characterising manual labour as play. (This is also fairly classist if you really want to deconstruct it, but deconstruction being a rather bourgeois pursuit, I'm none too surprised.)

Boy is used to posess, (Boy-friend)
Objectify, (Boy-toy)
Demean in terms of insufficient gravitas, (Boy-band)
Imply slavishness to rules, often irrelevant, (Boy-scout)
And yet, imply inherent violent and anti-social tendencies (Boys will be boys)
And lest we forget the ole school yard rhyme.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sean Tisdall:
Boy is often used in a misandristic context as well, as in boys with their toys, thus characterising manual labour as play. (This is also fairly classist if you really want to deconstruct it, but deconstruction being a rather bourgeois pursuit, I'm none too surprised.)

---

I've never, ever heard "boys with their toys" used in the context of manual labour (or any kind of work, for that matter.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by RealityBites:

I've never, ever heard "boys with their toys" used in the context of manual labour (or any kind of work, for that matter.)

I've always seen it in reference to the sort of "toys" adult men often enjoy in a manner similar to children, such as electronics or computer equipment or cars. The full expression is "The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys."

---

Needless to say, he didn't last long. Why I tolerated it as long as I did, I don't know. I guess I am/was just a really tolerant person.

Also had another boyfriend who used to call every lady he met, "ma'am"... As in saying, "Yes, ma'am" and "No, ma'am" often. I like that one. Sort has that deep south kind of charm, and it's full of respect, too. Sadly, he turned out to be a jerk in the end. But I still really dig guys that say it! Yes, ma'am, I do!!

quote:

---

Gentlemen, let me just say that you can never go wrong with this one!

---

I generally find the reaction against "political correctness" to be a bogus right-wing backlash. It does not require much effort to try and refer to people as they wish. It is a no brainer that you should not refer to a 75 year old woman as a "girl", "chick" or "babe". Likewise, it is inappropriate to refer to a 75 year old man as a "boy", "dude", or "bud". Why refer to a someone's gender at all?

Why not just say, "Are you free to help this _____"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cartman:
I generally find the reaction against "political correctness" to be a bogus right-wing backlash.

---

Me, too. It's basically a way for someone to say, "I'm going to be a rude prick, but if you dare call me on that, I'll accuse you of being a prude with the label 'politically correct'." It's just a rhetorical shield for people who want to be racist or sexist with impunity.

edited to insert missing word

[ 23 August 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cartman:

I am gonna use that one and get back to you.

---

Ummm..oh yes...

Word of warning Cartman ---

"Goddess" should probably not be used in the following circumstances:

1) When trying to pick up ladies. (usually looks cheesy)

2) When speaking to a nun. (You might get a strange look)

3) When speaking to a female police officer after you just got busted speeding. LOL

quote:

---

Originally posted by kurichina:
Me, too. It's basically a way for someone to say, "I'm going to be a rude prick, but if you dare call me on that, I'll accuse you of being a prude with the label 'politically correct'." It's just a rhetorical shield for people who want to be racist or sexist with impunity.

---