Unwomen at it again

[MockersxxxxxxxSocialDistancing]

What you say matters.

Help create a more equal world by using gender-neutral language if you're unsure about someone's gender or are referring to a group.

twitter.com/UN/status/1262322788687323136

So how does this work in French?
Also, there is a term for congress men and women, they are known as congressionals. And a landlord (mie's female) is not the same thing as an owner.

I rent out a property and always refer to myself as the "owner" because landlord seems bizarely feudal and anachronistic. I do see women referring to themselves as landlords though

Landlord and landlord is neither feudal nor anachronistic. It's the generally used term for some one who lets out property. You could use the gender neutral "lessor"

It is possible to draft a lease and call yourself whatever you want as long as you define it and stick to the definition throughout. E.g you could say FifteenToes" hereinafter referred to the as "the person who isn't really happy with the capitalist system despite collecting rent

The Landlord Registration sites for England and Wales and Scotland Northern Ireland all use the term "Landlord" The Scottish Government approved model tenancy agreement uses "Landlord"

Any kind of "Lord" is feudal by definition. That's what the word means. But in case I wasn't clear, I don't have a problem with anyone else using it, or a political axe to grind about it. It just feels peculiar to me so I'm more comfortable not referring to myself that way.

Would be curious to know what makes you think I'm not happy with the capitalist system (capitalism being a different thing from feudalism, and "owner" being basically a capitalist word). And what other assumptions you feel entitled to make about me despite knowing virtually nothing about me.

All of the things in that list make sense.

It's completely different to referring to women as gestational carriers, cervix havers or menstruators.

'Maiden name' ... don't forms ask for birth name, and/or any previous names?

Anyway ... let's correct that...use neutral language if you're unsure of a persons sex or if referring to a group which could be mixed.

So, there's no need for neutral terms for sexed roles, there is a need for neutral terms for other cases.

Anyway ... let's correct that...use neutral language if you're unsure of a persons sex or if referring to a group which could be mixed.

Or if it doesn't matter, which it often doesn't.

Taken literally the advice in the poster suggests using "chairman" if you know the person to be male, and "chair" if you're unsure. They don't suggest a word if you know the person is female, but I guess that hardly ever comes up in their meetings.

I also agree that neutral language prevents assumption of male default.

But this list doesn't make sense.

Apparently it's fine to use 'Mankind' and 'Manpower' as long as you know someone's gender or if you aren't talking about a group?

Words like 'chair' and 'firefighter' are generally used because the sex of the person involved is irrelevant, whether or not it is known, but according to this tweet the important thing is to avoid misgendering. Unnecessary gendering of jobs, even when harmful to women is apparently fine. Women, get back in your gender box.

This is a tweet from 'UN Women', but they don't seem to have the foggiest idea why neutral language benefits women.

Is the OP complaining that there's something bad about this?

More wrong than bad. Gender-neutral terminology in English is generally a good thing, and it is developing in the way that English vocabulary evolves. There are no more -esses like manageress or waitress, and certainly no -ettes.

It's wrong because:

• English is an irregular language that evolves. It is always wrong to attempt to impose vocabulary.

• Some of the examples are just wrong, and suggest the author is not a native English-speaker.

• The UN is a global organisation with six official languages. They seem to have singled out English in this respect.

• You might think the UN has more important things to worry about at the moment. As someone who would rather defend than defund the UN, this does not help me.

While I do agree with that, mockers, in the context of the UN English is doubtless something of a lingua franca. And some of the usages of 'international english' may well diverge slightly from the various (themselves divergent) anglophone Englishes. I'm not saying this is a good thing but I think it's something that happens.

I think it shows that when you mix a half understood ideology with international english, the result is meaningless. How does this list help anyone to create a more equal world?

According to this list, 'mankind' and 'manpower' are absolutely fine, just as long as your audience is all male.

I like a lot of these, tbh. Love humankind instead of mankind, workforce sounds very professional, firefighter, police officer, partner, spouse, legislator already seem to work very well. A couple of them are a bit clumsy though.

I don't like "humankind" - don't we already have "humanity" as an acceptable synonym of "mankind"?

I'm also getting flashbacks of Bart Simpson referring to his female postie as the "femail man".

If we take the heading at face value:

"If you don't know someone's (1) gender (2) or when talking about a group, use (3) gender-neutral (4) language"

(1) If you DO know "someone's gender" : (an individual, not a group)

Humankind - mankind - womankind
could all be appropriate depending on the meaning
eg. "she was the epitome of womankind" rather than "she was the epitome of female members of humankind" (how poetic!)

Chairman - Chair
"Convenor" is a well-established alternative in some parts that avoids the clumsiness of "Chairperson". "Chair" is fine but the UN is dictating (3), not suggesting.

Congressman - Legislator
"Legislator" would be insufficiently specific in some contexts (this is supposed to be about referring to a specific individual, not a group).

Businessman - Representative
Bizarre, nothing to do with "gender" and makes no sense unless the aim is to change understanding of the role of Business in relation to the public. Who/what is being "represented"??
Imagining Newspaper Headlines:
"Local Businessman . . "
"Local Businesswoman . . . "
"Local Representative . . " (of what?)
"Local Business Representative . . . " (a local representative of "business"? a "representative" of a local business?)

Policeman - Police Officer
As mentioned above, there are occasions when it is important to know the sex of the Police Officer.

From a feminist perspective, the move to use of "gender neutral" language has both upsides and downsides.

One of the downsides is that it over-rides the principle of "equal but different". Women as a group become invisible. The importance in some contexts of sex-difference is eroded.

Was there any need to remove the Job Title / Rank of "WPC" in order to ensure equality of pay, status, etc. between male and female? (Just thinking aloud.) In practice, where sex is relevant then "woman", "female" or "male" are often used in conjunction with "Police Officer".

Which is a good illustration of how messy the English language is in real life: ever heard of a "Man Police Officer"?

Landlord - Owner
Already done to death in previous posts. I read "Landlord" as meaning "Publican" so found this one very odd until I saw comments on it!

Boyfriend/Girlfriend - Partner
Cloth-eared beyond belief! See PP above.

• - - -

I am getting bored with that now!

(2) "Gender" : Or do they mean "sex"?

(3) "Use" : How very dare they! Eff' off with the compelled speech directives!

(4) "Gender-neutral" : just gets my hackles up every time I see the bloody term these days.

More seriously . . . there are circumstances in which it is useful to specify a restricted vocabulary. If this was the intention then "UN Women" should have made this clear, though why on earth "UN Women" should think it their business to dabble amateurishly in this area is another thing.

The example I remember is "Caterpillar English" but there are other examples of "Controlled Natural Language (CNL)"

"This is the website of the special interest group on Controlled Natural Language (CNL).

Controlled Natural Languages (CNL) are languages that are based on natural language but apply restrictions on vocabulary, grammar, and/or semantics. Some CNLs are designed to improve communication among humans, especially for non-native speakers of the respective natural language. In other cases, the restrictions on the language are supposed to make it easier for computers to analyze such texts in order to improve computer-aided, semi-automatic, or automatic translations into other languages. A third group of CNL has the goal to enable reliable automated reasoning and formal knowledge representation from seemingly natural texts."

www.sigcnl.org

I would hope that people who actually specialise in this sort of thing have a better handle on the subject.

If there are any Mumsnetters on FWR who are Linguists then maybe they might be motivated to check it out?

Ah the UN. Still on form.

Landlord may be feudal in origin but then 'Goodbye' comes from God be with you, a religious oath.

Where words come from is neither here nor there. What matters is where they are, and in Saussurian terms, to what meaning are they pointing.

Owner is not synonymous with landlord. In most commercial properties there will be an owner at the top, a head tenant and then sub- tenants and even sub- sub- tenants. The head tenant is not an owner.

Landlord is the standard word used in leasing arrangements. For anyone not wanting to act under the feudal yoke "lessor" is a perfectly acceptable alternative.