Men and Non-men

[noblegiraffe]

Interesting discussion here about men as default.

debuk.wordpress.com/2016/04/16/default-male/

Apart from wondering whether the Green Party tweet about non-men is an April Fools, men-as-default is something I've had to make an effort with when talking to my DD. I've noticed that unless the toy/picture in a book is specifically a girl, I'll call it 'Mr Octopus' or say 'What is the doggy doing? He's eating a bone'.

I'm going to be a hypocrite here. I've just picked up on a poster in AIBU for calling another poster an idiot. But in the case of the Green Party "idiot" explains much of their polices.

They are , at least in Scotland, a hard left, bordering on communism bunch of men who promote anti- women and class-envy policies.

This is a problem, yes.

I try to use female as default as often as I can.

That's not really solving the issue.

I write quite a lot of material at work which goes into the public domain. I was pleased to be reassured by our marketing team , that once one can get over the initial sense of it being odd, third person plural " they" etc should be used whenever possible or just "people".

"Non-man" - that really says so much about The Greens.

I am pretty sure that if you use "they", people will still default to male in their thinking. The linked article mentions that people perceive a completely genderless dog as male.

You cannot get away with using female default at work. I, however, can get away with it in my private life, and I will. It might not single-handedly solve the issue, but neither will the use of "they".
And female as default will make people think.

Hopefully, the non-blue party has already, or will somewhen in the future apologize for this.

Until it comes to my attention that they apologized, I shall refer to the British Green Party as the "British Non-Blue Party".

I see they are not suggesting the use of the term non-women to be inclusive about transgender males…..

I judge this to be non-sensical - bada boom tish!

I work in the NHS and try v hard not to default genders to male for doctors and female for nurse in discussions about different types of system users, but it can be hard going. I really cannot adopt the definition non-men unless all other discriminated groups do the same, e.g. non-whites, non-heterosexuals, etc. Would anyone even suggest such a thing?

I always think this when people whinge about Mumsnet being called Mumsnet. We spend much of our lives assuming man is the default and being treated as add-ons or being expected to accept the male term as covering us all.

I try and alternate genders in books and songs, the monkeys on the bed and Miss Polly's doctor are often women in our house. It's astonishing how many book characters are male or assumed to be so. Even at the farm you hear people saying, "oh look what he's doing" about the cow... It's ingrained.

I will definitely not be using non-men as a term any time soon though!

I've recommended this Twitter account before but Manwhohasitall is worth a look, e.g. "Being called a Policewoman doesn't bother me at all, because I know it covers both women and men," Andrew, Policewoman, age 40"

Possibly off topic, but I've never gotten why ships and airplanes are usually referred to as females.

A couple of possible answers to that here, Felicity. I can't really buy the argument about ships being 'unpredictable' (like women) - the sea or the weather, yes, but a ship is a ship. (Perhaps I am applying too much logic to the matter )

Would anyone even suggest such a thing?

Probably, yes. Considering that bisexuals are not that much rarer than homosexuals (though I don't know the exact percentages) and non-white could mean black people and Asian people, and Native Americans, and so on ... non-men is the most nonsensical term to use, and they have no shame, so why wouldn't they use those other ones?
I would not bet on the heterosexual, white male's unwillingness to use words like non-heterosexual and non-white.

And why not go even further and say "non- {heterosexual white male}"? That way, they can just hire a white male who is gay (but not too gay) and have all their quotas for "oppressed people" covered. After all, a gay man is sure to defend the interests of women and all oppressed ethnic minorities ... right?

Also, as grimbletart pointed out, apparently, transmen are also non-men. How convenient!

more likely suggestion relates to the idea of goddesses and mother figures playing a protective role in looking after a ship and crew.

I assumed that was the reasoning. There is "mother ship" as well in shipping, aviation and science fiction.

Here is a picture of a non cat........

It's a very cute non - cat. Is it your non-cat?

To be fair 2 categories of non men and non women is probably the best solution .

That was tongue in cheek btw. I meant to add that.

I can't work out whether manwhohasitall is standing shoulder to shoulder with feminists or taking the piss out of them. Probably being too literal or summat.

I've followed him (her?!) for a while, RomCom, and I would say definitely the former.

This could be a good solution going forward - the whole gender non binary thing could be covered by
Non men facilities
And
Nonwomen toilets

Sorry/non women facilities

Here's one of the non dogs getting into the spirit of things......

3 non dogs

(Dont be so bigoted!!)

The #greenpartyfeminists HT on Twitter was very funny.

And then you remember that the Greens are trying to erase the word woman because it doesn't suit a few of their members.

Fucking appalling. Sadly, after having previously voted Green on occasion, I've come to realise that Green Party candidates tend to espouse some fairly horrifically regressive views - but it's all okay because they're saving the planet!

^. They do get a free pass don't they?
And the "all the other parties are shit so I'm going for a party that's different" pass.