Do women have the right to say they feel uncomfortable over a name?

[SarahNade]

I hope this is as safe place to ask this. I am on a discussion on another thread, and it seems many think that a woman has no right to ask not to be addressed by a colloquial term, and if she does ask, she is the one being unreasonable for daring to stick her neck out, she is the one overreacting, for merely asking. Yet the male who went politely asked, gets offended that a woman dares utter her discomfort, and gets abusive with her. So why is it the woman who is 'overreacting' by merely asking not to be called something, but the man is not seen as overreacting by taking offence to her request and getting indignant?

Do women have the right to ask politely not be called something, without being told they are 'overreacting'? Or should women accept being called a term they don't like, shut up and put up with it in case she gets the male in trouble?

Having grown up and worked in the North East and married a Geordie, I can say with some confidence that while Geordie women will call both sexes of all ages “pet”, occasionally “hinny” if they (the caller) are older, Geordie men never use those terms towards other men, only towards women and girls. “Pet” is not an equal-opportunities term.

She has economic power over him - she could make a complaint to his employer which could result in his dismissal.

He also has power to complain to his boss about her and get her blacklisted/banned from using their delivery service.

So they are basically 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

Only and somehow a lot of posters insist that it happens,regularly,normally and equally in "these parts".

OnlyTheTitOfTheIceberg

For what reason to women call men and women "pet"?

@PlanDeRaccordement Can we not have this discussion again? You were schooled on your deliberate twisting of my words on the other thread. I will not stand for it on here. Rape is as valid a comparison as any, and you know it. It is exactly this disrespect that you are enabling that leads to those things. And it is women standing up and speaking out, drawing their boundaries, that creates cultural and generational change.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras So then I guess you wouldn't complain if you heard the n word outside of American dialect then, right? Using a term that is known everywhere as being on of the terms men use to patronise and belittle women, and then saying the woman is in the wrong for not shutting up about it, is offensive. No matter the dialect, the country, the continent. If someone asks you not to call them something, it is rude to continue. That is basic human standards. If other countries in the western world at least, stop saying a term whether it be love or n, then why can't the UK adapt and change?

Sometimes a man using "love" is being sexist. Sometimes a woman using "love" is being patronising or demeaning. Sometimes both are being friendly.

Well that’s getting closer to the truth.

The next questions to ask are:

Do women who use those endearments apply them equally to both men and women?

Do men apply them equally to both men and women?

If the answer is yes to one but not the other then you have yourself some sexism.

In which case the next question is - is that sexism actually harmful?

So, is calling someone “love” patronising or pedastally? Or both?

And gets to decide the answer? The caller or the callee?

Perhaps you haven't been on this board for long, Hearhoovesthinkzebras , but on this board, if you are replying to someone, (and not just simply referring to them in passing or a point made) it is proper etiquette, indeed expected, to @ them.

HTH

Geordie men never use those terms towards other men, only towards women and girls. “Pet” is not an equal-opportunities term.

Yes, but that is because of sublimated (or sometimes not so sublimated) homophobia. Men don't use terms of endearment towards each other for fear of being thought gay.

If 'pet' was a power play on the part of men over women, then men wouldn't accept being called 'pet' by women, but they do. So although it is gendered, the root is not necessarily sexism.

But of course in many cases it clearly is sexism. DreichDrizzle gave a particular egregious example up thread.

The problem is there are no universals here. Usage is hugely culturally specific. Being called 'pet' in Newcastle is completely by the by, but being called 'pet' in Oxford (say) clearly has intent behind it.

That's why this thread is fruitless, because people are assuming different cultural contexts.

SarahNade

I have already asked you, politely, to please not @ me on this thread. On this board it is considered rude to do it, particularly after you have been asked to desist. Do you also have a problem respecting boundaries?

Would I complain if I heard the n word outside of an American dialect? No I wouldn't. I live in London and gear it used by people of colour every day. As far as I am concerned it is their word and if they choose to use it then that is not my business. If I heard a white person calling someone the n word in a deliberate attempt to be offensive then yes I would call them out. I always call out racism whenever I hear it, including when I was at work just this week and an elderly lady was being racist to another customer. But that's the point - words aren't always offensive. It very much depends on context and intent.

Perhaps you haven't been on this board for long,Hearhoovesthinkzebras, but on this board, if you are replying to someone, (and not just simply referring to them in passing or a point made) it is proper etiquette, indeed expected, to @ them

HTH

Who appointed you board monitor Sarah

Clearly you can't have been around that long or you would have seen the regular FWR outrage at being @ atted. Personally I think the outrage was ridiculous but there are plenty of FWR regulars who hate the use of @plus name and frequently say so.

No SarahNade on this board in particular, it is very much not etiquette to @ someone though I do look forward to seeing you do it to many of the regulars, repeatedly even after they ask you to stop. I'm sure it will be very entertaining to watch.

Yes, but that is because of sublimated (or sometimes not so sublimated) homophobia. Men don't use terms of endearment towards each other for fear of being thought gay.

Oooh yes that’s good. However I tend to think of homophobia as being an extension of misogyny.

Not quite sure why. It’s something to do with the fact that “don’t be gay” and “don’t be a girl” seem to come from the same mouths.

Obviously I don’t think people are doing this intentionally. It’s more that certain actions and words are socially acceptable rather than that person being a pussydick (see what I did there?)

If someone asks you not to call them something, it is rude to continue. That is basic human standards.

Oh the irony.

He took offence because you took offence.

This is the issue for me. Not being called love, no matter the context, but that having been asked not to, he felt entitled to be offended because she was offended, rather than just carrying on and not saying it (if it was normal speech for him, he might have said it again, and again, could have just moved on)

I see this in my dynamic at home - DP gets more upset that I've pointed out he's upset me, than because I'm upset - like I'm getting upset just to make him feel bad, and that makes me a bad person.

It's selfish, narcissistic - 'the other person's feelings don't matter, they must just be having them to get at me'

But mate is lovely and inclusive and comradely. I want to be called mate!

Mate is awful. I am not a man.

Women feel these experiences differently. It's about the intent and use of those words. They're not blanket 'bad'. I'd feel intimidated by a drunk man shouting 'all right love' across the street but not a bus driver saying 'thanks love' when I pay.

Exactly.
Context is key

That's why this thread is fruitless, because people are assuming different cultural contexts.

Exactly.

Also, to take your points coatlessinspokane in some parts of the country men do use these terms of endearment to men and women ie I have often heard "me duck" used completely equally between to and from men and women. Personally I haven't heard "love" used between men but I do hear Nate or fella used which to me have the same intent ie an informal, familiar greeting rather than say "sir". I don't see this as being sexist. They are just different words conveying the same message eg more formally we would use sir and madam but that isn't being sexist is it?

If someone asks you not to call them something, it is rude to continue. That is basic human standards

Have I seriously just read that on here?
Wow.
I mean, if that's the case none of the trans threads on here would misgender people knowing full well they were upsetting and being offensive.
Oh wait.....

WotchaTalkinBoutWillis

This point has not eluded me throughout this thread.

It seems to becoming very common for people to use "that's abuse" or "you're abusing me" in the middle of disputes these days.
It's not necessarily angry or aggressive, but it is a kind of argument tactic.
Social niceties don't really apply in the OPs case, because it was a dispute, an argument.
I saw two women arguing about a parking space in a supermarket the other day and they were using "friendly and polite" terms (including love) in aggresive and patronising ways.

Obviously anyone has the right to request not to be called something.

But who is unreasonable depends entirely on context. One person saying 'love' or 'darling' etc could be be polite, kind, friendly whilst another person saying it a different way could be patronising, rude or sleazy.

Perhaps you haven't been on this board for long,Hearhoovesthinkzebras, but on this board, if you are replying to someone, (and not just simply referring to them in passing or a point made) it is proper etiquette, indeed expected, to @ them

Just seen this.
On this board? As in FWR?
You'll find it's completely the opposite.
Try doing it to some regulars, see where it gets you.
They realllllly don't like it, you'll probably get "don't fucking @ me"

Oooh yes that’s good. However I tend to think of homophobia as being an extension of misogyny.

True, the two are deeply inter-related. But my point is that if men thought of 'pet' as a status signaler then they wouldn't let women address them with it, but clearly they do. So in the context of the Geordie vernacular at least, it is more a neutral term of familiarity.

But obviously in other contexts, these kind of words are absolutely used as diminutives towards women.

That's why there can't really be any universal rules about what the 'correct' terms of address should be.

Oh god , PLEASE do not @ me in an ordinary reply in a discussion. If I’m reading and taking part, I’ll see it. If I am not I don’t want my Inbox clogged up with notifications about every frickin post!