House rule changes on gendered language; Tulsi Gabbard comments

[Zinco]

The rule change to ban certain gendered terms just seems bizarre... what are they trying to achieve? They seem to have gone more insane in the USA with this stuff than other countries so far.

For people that are easily offended by this kind of thing, this is a very right wing show that Tulsi Gabbard is appearing on.

@MoltenLasagne

Good laws should always consider what the unintended consequences could be.

In the USA, there was already a woman who lost an employment rights case to do with breastfeeding because "parents" rather than "mothers" can breastfeed. There are specific protections that pregnant women and mothers who have given birth to children need in the workplace and the USA are already extremely poor in protecting them. Who benefits from obscuring this by changing language from "mothers" to "parents"?

The case you refer to is either a peculiarity of US law and/or was extremely poorly argued on behalf of the party who lost.

The protection for persons who are pregnant or breastfeeding in UK law relies on the fact the person claiming those rights is physically pregnant or breastfeeding.

"Shero" is a laughably horrible pointless neologism. There is no reason to not use "hero" as a non- gendered word or if you insist on having a female version there is nothing wrong with "heroine".

Using "shero" is as daft as "awoman" or "womxn"

If I remember correctly Dido it was a peculiarity of state law rather than federal US law. I'd have to dig it out again to get the specifics as I'm a) not a lawyer and b) not au fait with how federal / state law clashes are handled. It was in a fire at will state I believe.

EdgeOfACoin, I was prepared to accept in the 1960s that many of the female people in the profession felt that the feminisation of the professional description was demeaning to them, and wanted to be rid of it. At that time I think there was quite strong feeling that feminised versions of roles (poetess, authoress, graduette spring to mind, and yes, those were used in the media, yick) should revert to a single, shorter and not "diminutive" version. Actor wasn't seen as being masculine, more as being like doctor or professor or sculptor or tutor (or dentist or architect) -- a word for someone with a particular qualification which did not need to have an obviously-feminised version.

I always feel a stab of irritation at seeing the word 'shero' on here as well, though I appreciate the wordplay. There's already a word for a female hero - heroine. What on earth is wrong with heroine? Why is the masculine version always the default, even on a feminism board??

Guilty and point taken.

I like the fact that it has she and her and reminds me of She-Ra (Showing my age).

Using "shero" is as daft as "awoman" or "womxn"

Ouch - that seems a bit harsh as I only include the vulva/cervix/vagina-haver kind.

@EdgeOfACoin

To take an obvious example in English - it's perfectly sensible and normal now for thespians to all be referred to as 'actors' as the default. But if a woman for some reason prefers 'actress' then I wouldn't see that as problematic.

I actually think it is a shame this has happened. At some point someone decided that 'actress' was a more lightweight title than 'actor' and 'actor' became applied equally to men and women.

But why? Why was the feminine version of the word 'lesser' than the masculine?

I don't really want to revive poetess or manageress, because they're a bit different. However, given that actresses take different roles from actors, I don't see a problem with retaining these gendered terms.

I always feel a stab of irritation at seeing the word 'shero' on here as well, though I appreciate the wordplay. There's already a word for a female hero - heroine. What on earth is wrong with heroine? Why is the masculine version always the default, even on a feminism board??

Bit of a typo there. 'Shero' has a male ending. The female form for a brave person is 'She-ra' en.wikipedia.org/wiki/She-Ra The male form is of course, 'He-Man'.

More seriously, there's soming quite nice about ;aviatrix' and whatever other words have that 'ix' suffix. Agitatrix? Curatrix? Sound like friends of Asterix!

@AntsInPenzance

It's not a ban on gendered terms, just renaming certain words in official language, for example chairman will now be chair. Terms for familial relationships such as mother and father will be replaced with parent, which is more inclusive of gay parents whilst remaining linguistically accurate.

France did something similar a few years ago.

How is it more inclusive of gay parents? I know several gay parents; in all instances the men refer to themselves as daddy / dad / pops, some with their first name following. The women all are universally mummy (first name). All would be offended if they were NOT referred to as such by others.

How is it more inclusive of gay parents? I know several gay parents; in all instances the men refer to themselves as daddy / dad / pops, some with their first name following. The women all are universally mummy (first name). All would be offended if they were NOT referred to as such by others.

That's all good if they're being referred to specifically. However, general school announcements, letters etc 'parents' include both sexes of parent in any combination. Most of the time this is a complete non-issue - parents' evening etc.

@ErrolTheDragon

How is it more inclusive of gay parents? I know several gay parents; in all instances the men refer to themselves as daddy / dad / pops, some with their first name following. The women all are universally mummy (first name). All would be offended if they were NOT referred to as such by others.

That's all good if they're being referred to specifically. However, general school announcements, letters etc 'parents' include both sexes of parent in any combination. Most of the time this is a complete non-issue - parents' evening etc.

Parents, plural, was an issue a long time ago. It always seemed awkward, the adding of 'or guardians', but that definately was a good thing.

It would be wonderful, in Two Ronnies terms, if people started going on about womanhole covers, and the howler about Amen was a good start, unless it really was meant as a joke? but I suspect that it would be a real fellow-travellers losing moment for the Democrats were they to attempts large-scale language reform/policing.

The suggestion that it might possibly happen certainly gave a very right-wing television presenter a chance to sling mud at the Democrats.

Like the whole "the Democrats want to forbid us to say Merry Christmas" bollocks.

I remember at the time "actress" was dropped hearing it was because it had long standing overtones of promiscuity or sexual availability. It was used by people who weren't really in acting, similarly to "model" either for prostitution or simply catching a provider (man).

I remember I stopped saying heroine back in the 90s because of heroin.

Possibly going off track here, and maybe showing my age (again) but surely words like these have gender not sex.
Bit of a typo there. 'Shero' has a male ending. The female form for a brave person is 'She-ra' en.wikipedia.org/wiki/She-Ra
The male form is of course, 'He-Man'.
"o" is the masculine ending and "a" is the feminine ending etc.
Or not?

@HidingUnderARock

I remember at the time "actress" was dropped hearing it was because it had long standing overtones of promiscuity or sexual availability. It was used by people who weren't really in acting, similarly to "model" either for prostitution or simply catching a provider (man).

I remember I stopped saying heroine back in the 90s because of heroin.

Possibly going off track here, and maybe showing my age (again) but surely words like these have gender not sex.
Bit of a typo there. 'Shero' has a male ending. The female form for a brave person is 'She-ra' en.wikipedia.org/wiki/She-Ra
The male form is of course, 'He-Man'.
"o" is the masculine ending and "a" is the feminine ending etc.
Or not?

It was only meant as a bit of whimsey, but when 'brava' is used, it's the female equivilent of 'bravo', and that feels right, somehow. On the other hand 'shero' just sounds like a version of 'hero'. 'Heroine' somehow sounds pretty damned good.

I had to google it, but it turns out that Hero was a woman www.behindthename.com/name/hero-1 and the name has no etymological connection to the impersonal noun.

There's executrix (female executor) which is still occasionally used.

There used to be "heritable proprietrix" but it's pretty archaic now.

I can see a justification for keeping actress much as dancer or even ballet dancer cover both sexes but ballerina is specifically female.

Shero and Shera are both as ridiculous as that troupe of male "ballerinas"

Words sometimes change gender. I like_

"person employed to tap liquors," Old English tæppestre "female tavern-keeper, hostess at an inn, woman employed to tap liquors," fem of tæppere, from tæppa "tap" (see tap (n.1)) + fem. ending -ster. The distinction of gender in the word was lost by 15c., and by 1630s re-feminized tapstress is attested."
(Women were heavily involed in the brewing industry
Has anyone ever actually used Manx as a male version of Minx? www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=manx

"Terms for familial relationships such as mother and father will be replaced with parent, which is more inclusive of gay parents whilst remaining linguistically accurate."

I don't see why you need a ban on the language to be inclusive of gay parents.

You can say something like, "mother, father, or legal guardian" which would pretty much cover any situation. Unless you are so offended by "mother" and "father" because the occasional person claims to be non-binary?

Are we going to change all our language so as not to (hypothetically) offend some non-binary people?

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime said:

"The suggestion that it might possibly happen certainly gave a very right-wing television presenter a chance to sling mud at the Democrats.

Like the whole "the Democrats want to forbid us to say Merry Christmas" bollocks."

As far as I'm aware, this isn't mere "suggestion that it might possibly happen".

Rather, the rules have actually been changed in such a way.

Quote:

thehill.com/homenews/house/532733-tulsi-gabbard-blasts-new-house-rules-on-gender-neutral-language-as-height-of?amp

"The new rules, passed by the House on Monday, ban gendered words including mother, father, brother and sister to "honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral.""

So yeah, according to Democrats, we have to change our language because of non-binary people. I'm assuming it's non-binary people that are the issue anyway. What else could it be?

And first cousin is gendered? Since when?

I'm still trying to work out how maternal grandmother/grandfather' would have to be changed.
I still have trouble with fiance/fiancee. I don't suppose there's much difference in pronounciation.

I believe "first cousin" as an example was an error by Tucker Carlson.

Real story, generally speaking.

One false example was given as part of it.

It was Tucker Carlson. You expect me to believe him? If he said I had two legs I'd be checking my own body a bit anxiously.

Sorry for seeming a bit serious Defaultname I think I'm just trying to get it straight in my head by putting my thoughts out here for mumsnet sanity checking.

Male and female are not and never have been genders. Masculine and femnine are genders - male and female are sexes.
MtoF trans is Masculine to Feminine. FtoM trans is Feminine to Masculine.

Or is it that MtoF is Male to Feminine and FtoM is Female to Masculine?

No offense taken. Don't worry about it.

I mentioned to someone yesterday that I posted on Mumsnet, and she was worried, because there were so many aggressive, nasty threads.

I told her that I'd read only a day or two ago about how peaceful and supportive these threads are compared to some....Thinking about it now, I'm worried that she might have meant these very boards! (Wrongly, and hopefully throgh hearsay, if so).

There are quite a few references to ‘gender neutral’ terminology in posts above. Personally I always try to use ‘sex neutral’ when describing language choices, not ‘gender neutral’.

Gender is a set of stereotypes. A term such as ‘chairman’ (as opposed to ‘chair’) can be gender neutral because it indicates nothing about the set of stereotypical behaviours with which the holder of the office feels most at ease. The problem, rather, is that it is not a sex neutral term.