Actresses

[Qcng]

Hello
Can anyone explain why an actress is now referred to as an "actor" (and also a waitress is now referred to as a "waitor")
Thanks.

Reflecting that we don’t need separate job titles just because someone happens to be a woman perhaps? We don’t distinguish when someone is a teacher, doctor or lawyer, do we?

When it comes to acting, women should play women’s parts, men should play men’s parts. (Very few exceptions to that, eg Linda Hunt in The Year of Living Dangerously).

I think the distinction is important when it comes to awards. If you abolish the categories and awards are just given to ‘Best Actor’ then most of them will go to men because most films are about men.

I'm not sure it's particularly feminists who do that, but it's normal for the usage of words to change over time. Nobody is a manageress any more.

Some women prefer to be called 'actresses' rather than actors because - in contrast to many other professions (doctor, lawyer, engineer, etc etc) their sex often does matter. There are some parts which can really only be played by the correct sex (or ethnicity, age etc) whereas some may be effectively played by either sex.

It seems to me to be one of those things where it's up to each performer to decide which they prefer.

I would suggest that the suffix 'ess' used to mean you got paid less, and so became unpopular.

I found this odd when in first heard of it. I tend to agree with the OP that it's worthy of a separate category because it's quite a different job that can only be done by a woman, unlike doctoring or lawyering, etc. But they tend to prefix with "female" instead, so now you have actors and female actors, doctors and female doctors (and I'm sure I've heard lady doctor used before, probably from my dad though!)

I think ‘female actor’ is worse. That’s setting male up as the default, female as a special case.

I think ‘female actor’ is worse. That’s setting male up as the default, female as a special case.

Yes, that would be worse.I'm not sure I've seen that term used though - unless in a discussion about eg female actors' remuneration vs male actors.

Does it ever go the opposite way? Like actors becoming actresses?

Or is it a case of stepping up but not down?

Blimey! - you've only just noticed that?

Because they bloody well want to?

How about authors? Should we use "authoress" to signal a female writer so we can more easily avoid middle-class, white, male produced fiction?

Actress is often used in a derogatory way. Akin to prostitute- as in the 1600's they often were.

It was illegal for women to go on the stage in Shakespeare's time, so men played all the parts. I use actress (for myself) for that reason- actress to me references that women had to fight to be recognised in theatre.

On the other hand actress is used as a stick to beat women with. I.E. being duplicitous. Ref a lot of what was said about Meghan Markle, where the connotations of being an actress were negative.

How about authors?

There is of course a history of women writing under male pseudonyms. Very different to acting.

There is of course a history of women writing under male pseudonyms. Very different to acting.

Yes, as a librarian I find this fascinating. But I'm not sure why it's "very different to acting".

The output of females should surely be proudly there for all to see, after all, we're not in the early 19th century anymore.

So if some people think that actress is a good feminist signifier for a female thespian, then surely authoress should be an equally good signifier for a female fiction writer.

So if some people think that actress is a good feminist signifier for a female thespian, then surely authoress should be an equally good signifier for a female fiction writer

That makes no sense at all. The sex of a writer is irrelevant to the writer's ability to write. Whilst there are opportunities for cross- sex casting in a small number of works (e.g the several female King Lears) the sex of the actor is relevant to the actor's ability to play the part.

How about authors? Should we use "authoress" to signal a female writer so we can more easily avoid middle-class, white, male produced fiction?

Is this sarcasm or are you actually serious?

It is quicker to find auditions and advertise roles if you don't have to type
" actor to play male/ female role" all the time.
I have an actress in my family and she is quite happy to be referred to as such.

I am an actor, most actors I know who are women would be very unhappy to be called an actress. Always actor, or probably commonly performer, but most people I know are multidisciplinary. I don't work in a sphere where awards are given, so we can probably all deal with not falling into a 'best supporting actress category'. Though I can appreciate that might have relevance if women are to cling onto awards in certain industry sectors.

There is of course a history of women writing under male pseudonyms. Very different to acting.

Yes, as a librarian I find this fascinating. But I'm not sure why it's "very different to acting

Writing under a pseudonym is different from acting as you don't see the author when you pick up their book. A female actor working under a male pseudonym will likely be found out when they submit their headshot or attend an audition, so there's not the same scope for deception.

I wouldn't refer to someone as a 'female actor' as a matter of course (a la 'lady doctor' or similar). However, there are times when it might be useful to differentiate between male and female actors (when casting, discussing diversity, or similar) and in these situations, I don't think it's bed to refer to 'female actors' as that's what you're talking about.

*bad

I'm not hugely keen on actress but clearly circumstances dictate that the sex of the actor is relevant.

That does not apply to writing unless I suppose one really wanted to avoid buying anything written by middle-class, white, men - which seems a bizarre mindset as opposed to considering whether this is a book worth reading regardless of the sex or class of the writer.

In the case of books, there will be some genres where someone with a particular life experience - be that sex, age, ethnicity, etc etc - is more likely to write convincingly than someone who doesn't have that. Indication of sex alone isn't too useful as a filter.

What about goddesses?

Some really thought provoking replies here thanks, (sorry for late return I got busy!) I did not know women were forbidden from acting during Shakespeare's time.

LOL Goddesses. Why isn't it Our Mother who art in heaven hallowed be thy name... (we all know the answer to that one). The Pope recently declared 'God' to be gender neutral. I just thought well that will be one heck of a job re-writing the entire Bible using gender neutral pronouns and replacing the word 'Father' with 'Person'.

Also, the meaning of 'priestess' gives quite a different picture to 'priest'.

Basically I'm interested to understand if erasing things like 'police woman' and 'waitress' etc results in a feminist outcome. and how there is a parallel between this direction and the direction of the gender revolution, to which feminists are opposed.