Skirt Cafe is an on-line community dedicated to exploring, promoting and advocating skirts and kilts as a fashion choice for men, formerly known as men in skirts. We do this in the context of men's fashion freedom --- an expansion of choices beyond those commonly available for men to include kilts, skirts and other garments. We recognize a diversity of styles our members feel comfortable wearing, and do not exclude any potential choices. Continuing dialog on gender is encouraged in the context of fashion freedom for men. See here for more details.
Imagine getting an email from your boss starting "Hi humans!"
Back on topic will we?
I work as a radiographer, or what in Sweden is known as Röntgensjuksköterska, the literal translation would be X-Ray nurse, where Sjuksköterska(nurse) is a feminine job title. The masculine would be Sjukskötare, (and some males working use that instead) but our job is defined in law, so that's not the correct title.
I always introduce myself by name and as a Röntgensjuksköterska to patients - Its a job title and I went through 3 years of university to be allowed to work as one. We have a lot of gendered legacy in our languages and maybe in the future it will be erased, but languages don't change fast, its a generational thing. Over time, the feminine form will become ungendered, ofc its different when your job title ends with -man/-woman, there might be need for a renaming of those professions into something more ungendered like firefighter or constable.
Not alone with a dream, Just a want to be free, With a need to belong,
I am a skirtsman
Freedom, Freedom, Freedom, Freedom
Stu wrote: ↑Sun Oct 20, 2024 9:02 pm
I said you shouldn't be in management if you only offered colleagues "minimum assistance" because they used a word you didn't like. That is petulant and childish.
Ironic, when you state that you won’t use a word you don’t like (when others ask you to refer to them as, for example, she/her).
Where exactly did I state that I won't use a word I don't like? You are putting words in my mouth which I didn't say, Ray. I use the word "they" all the time. When it comes to word choice in any given utterance then, aside from a person's given or chosen name, the decision as to which applies rests with the speaker and is conventionally based on factors such as the grammar, semantics and the context.
If you chose to wear a crown because you believed yourself to be a king, should I refer to you when speaking to others as "His Majesty"?
Seb wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 7:20 am
Imagine getting an email from your boss starting "Hi humans!"
We have a lot of gendered legacy in our languages and maybe in the future it will be erased, but languages don't change fast, its a generational thing. Over time, the feminine form will become ungendered, ofc its different when your job title ends with -man/-woman, there might be need for a renaming of those professions into something more ungendered like firefighter or constable.
That's fair enough, Seb. Language chance is an evolutionary process and is, as you tightly suggest, a slow process. It should not be forced in any particular direction by people who have a political/ideological agenda.
Interesting that you refer to your job title. When I lived in Sweden, the word for nurse was, if I remember correctly, sjuksköterska, and the final morpheme would normally make it a feminine noun. It is, I believe, still used by males and rightly so. You earned your degree and you are proud of the title: it refers to your job rather than your gender. Similarly, in words like "fisherman" and "fireman", the last three letters (man) are morphological rather than lexical. As such, they don't necessarily refer to the gender of the person performing the role. It even applies to the word "woman" which has "man" at the end. It's slightly different for "policeman" because there is an established noun for its feminine counterpart - "policewoman".
When my wife was pregnant with our first child, we received a visit at our home from two of the local midwives, one a senior (female) midwife who was supervising the other, much younger trainee midwife who was nearly at the end of the training course and was about to become fully qualified. Now the thing that makes this relevant was that the trainee was male - his title was "trainee male midwife" (and he was about to become one of the first male midwives in the region.)
This "male midwife" title seemed rather clumsy, but was justified to us by analysing its etymology: the element "_wife" does not mean that the midwife person is female, but rather that it is someone who is WITH a female since the element "mid-" is merely a Middle English preposition (c.f. the modern German preposition "mit", equivalent to "with" in English.)
Etymology (from Wictionary - https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/midwife)
From Middle English midwif, corresponding to mid (“with”) + wif (“woman, wife, female”).
Sadly, we later learned that the young man, though well considered professionally for his skills in midwifery, had moved on into management of the service because he was viewed with suspicion by too many expectant mothers. Another case of gendered prejudice or discrimination?
Historically, in English, the word "man" in many contexts was sexually inclusive, just meaning a human person. That was what the syllable in "mailman" and the like means. When I was growing up, "he", "him", "his" and the like were used for "that one whose sex is unknown or irrelevant". It's used that way in US legal documents. Language changes, but changes slowly.
You have made it quite clear in previous postings that you would not use she/her for a transgendered male who believes she is female. You further stated that you would refuse to do so irrespective of the wishes and preferences of that person. I merely pointed that out.
Your reference to royalty is a form of reductio ad absurdum and isn’t worth commenting on.
You have made it quite clear in previous postings that you would not use she/her for a transgendered male who believes she is female.
I have said no such thing, Ray. I have always referred to trans women/girls as she/her - and vice-versa for trans men/boys. I always had that policy with my own trans students of whom I have had several. Please look back at my previous statements and come back and confirm you have made a mistake.
Ray wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 12:44 pm
You further stated that you would refuse to do so irrespective of the wishes and preferences of that person. I merely pointed that out.
Their wishes are not the deciding factor. My position has been that, if someone meets me half-way by way of exhibiting signifiers, then I will respond accordingly. So if someone wears a dress, heels and full make-up and heels and calls themselves "Caroline", my default will be to use she/her. If that individual also sports a full beard, then I will go to he/him. I decide based on what my senses tell me.
Ray wrote: ↑Mon Oct 21, 2024 12:44 pm
Your reference to royalty is a form of reductio ad absurdum and isn’t worth commenting on.
No. It's an entirely valid analogy. We are under no obligation, moral or otherwise, to accept what people say about themselves and modify our language accordingly if our five senses and/or powers of reasoning tell us that is factually wrong. Speech and other forms of communication carry a duty to say what we believe to be true and for which we have evidence (check out H P Grice's Cooperative Principle). That applies whether the words we use are pronouns (he/she/it) or nouns (Your Majesty, Your Honour, Colonel - whatever).
I remember an interview years ago where female England international cricketers were adamant that they should be referred to as batsmen. A quick google shows that the term batter has now been adopted to cover both sexes.
Amid all this gender description difficulty I'm glad that my chosen career was not so affected. Doctor and Dentist circumnavigate this difficulty completely.
Kirbstone wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2024 3:01 am
Amid all this gender description difficulty I'm glad that my chosen career was not so affected. Doctor and Dentist circumnavigate this difficulty completely.
Tom
As does "Senior Nuclear Reactor Operator" which was my title before I retired. It was used for both male and female senior operators.
"It is better to be hated for what you are than be loved for what you are not" Andre Gide: 1869 - 1951 Always be yourself because the people that matter don’t mind and the ones that mind don’t matter.
I work in a really small company, but we can boast of having a 50% male/female employee ratio.
We each have many titles to play with but mine are all non gendered designer, engineer, installer, secretary, programmer, Managing Director.
As is Mrs Mouse who is Bookkeeper, Office manager, Accounts manager and many others.
Being a small company we can make up what ever title we like, but in the end it is just two people making a living trying to keep all of our clients happy!
Kirbstone wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2024 3:01 am
Amid all this gender description difficulty I'm glad that my chosen career was not so affected. Doctor and Dentist circumnavigate this difficulty completely.
Tom
Indeed. In my case, I can and do use the "Dr" title, but it's a PhD rather than medical, and people would only know my gender if they had actually seen me or if I used my first name. So I guess that means I have a gender neutral title as "doctress" has been obsolete for many years.
Trying to get the thread back on topic it's clear that terms like policeman, fireman etc date back to the days when only men did the jobs. It may be that some women don't mind adopting those terms but many do and object to the implication that only men can do the job. I was surprised on watching cricket a year or back when I heard the term batter but then it's a logical companion to bowler or fielder. The comments about sister/matron almost becoming "unisex" are interesting - my recollection was that males in the role of "sister" tended to be charge nurses but it appears it varies between hospitals. I recall (mainly from period TV dramas) that policewomen used to be WPC's - woman police constable - but I believe the woman bit has been dropped since constable appears ungendered. It probably helps in English that we don't have gendered nouns like in Seb's examples!
I do however have a recollection from a long time ago where someone suggested "bod" as an acceptable, short and uncomplicated gender-neutral replacement. Hence you would have policebod, firebod, chairbod etc and they even extended it to "bodhole" (the metal cover over a drain)!
P.S. Please nobody mention pronouns when Stu's around!!
