Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Boy to a black male has a racist connotation. Not at all similar.
I'm being insistent because of the double standard with it. Nobody has a problem calling men boys, women don't, and men don't... because we all know what it means. No one has a problem with boyfriend, or girlfriend either.
And yes, people in professional workplaces say, she's a nice girl, or a nice lady, or a nice woman interchangeably, just as they say he's a nice guy, or nice boy, or nice man. I've seen and heard it working at big four accounting groups, ivy league universities, governments, major NGOs, etc etc. No one bats an eyelash. Unless they are the type that looks to get offended.
When someone says they want to find a nice boy, or a nice girl, its' really childish and insulting then to go off on some "well that's your problem, you should be looking for a man, not a boy" idiotic tangent. We all know what they meant.
I'm basically telling people to stop being jerks.
On this topic, I always find that you don't offend (as many) people if you use the correct "mate" to the word.
It's when you mix things like gentleman and girl... or woman and boy... man and girl... lady and boy... guy and lady... lady and male... man and female... that it grates. I guess because in the case of something like woman and boy or man and girl it suggests one of the pair is a child/not a full adult (or it's grammatically awkward). You can also make a judgement on something like lady and man... "A lady was confronted by a man," has a different tone than "a lady was confronted by a gentleman" and still a different tone than "a lady was confronted by a male."
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMBGBlueCanary
On this topic, I always find that you don't offend (as many) people if you use the correct "mate" to the word.
For example:
man/woman
boy/girl
guy/gal
lady/gentlemen
It's when you mix things like gentleman and girl... or woman and boy... man and girl... lady and boy... guy and lady... that it grates. I guess because in the case of something like woman and boy or man and girl it suggests one of the pair is a child/not a full adult (or it's grammatically awkward).
Oh I agree with you there. But i also see guy/girl matching, as gal is almost never used, and guy is even used in a gender neutral voice nowadays, by both men and women.
Boy to a black male has a racist connotation. Not at all similar.
I'm being insistent because of the double standard with it. Nobody has a problem calling men boys, women don't, and men don't... because we all know what it means. No one has a problem with boyfriend, or girlfriend either.
And yes, people in professional workplaces say, she's a nice girl, or a nice lady, or a nice woman interchangeably, just as they say he's a nice guy, or nice boy, or nice man. I've seen and heard it working at big four accounting groups, ivy league universities, governments, major NGOs, etc etc. No one bats an eyelash. Unless they are the type that looks to get offended.
When someone says they want to find a nice boy, or a nice girl, its' really childish and insulting then to go off on some "well that's your problem, you should be looking for a man, not a boy" idiotic tangent. We all know what they meant.
I'm basically telling people to stop being jerks.
I agree that the comparison of "boy" used in reference to a black man is different from "girl" used in reference to a woman, but I think it's a matter of degree. A significant degree, but still "girl" does have a history of being used to dismiss a person. I don't use that term for anyone out of HS. I sometimes say "young woman" to reference someone in her late teens or early 20s, but at some point I settle on "woman" and leave it there.
Having said all that, I don't know that using "girl" in any other way really says much definitive about a person. I know that I'm kind of stiff about these things, so my standards may not be the best to apply. The OP used girl and woman/women in his post. I don't know what he means by girl, so I won't assume that I do. I will concede that I might feel differently if I were a woman. I almost certainly would, given my tendency to analyze comments about men.
Oh I agree with you there. But i also see guy/girl matching, as gal is almost never used, and guy is even used in a gender neutral voice nowadays, by both men and women.
True. I think "guy/gal" is by the wayside.
By the way, I added a little more to my post to illustrate what I mean about the words not matching and how it can change the tone of a sentence. Although I highly suspect with most posters, the use of mismatching nouns is more a bad grammatical habit than any bad intent. Except for the ones that refer to women as "females" all the time. They usually have an agenda.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMBGBlueCanary
True. I think "guy/gal" is by the wayside.
By the way, I added a little more to my post to illustrate what I mean about the words not matching and how it can change the tone of a sentence. Although I highly suspect with most posters, the use of mismatching nouns is more a bad grammatical habit than any bad intent. Except for the ones that refer to women as "females" all the time. They usually have an agenda.
I agree on all accounts.
Not ironically, I overheard one of my female coworkers just saying how her son met a nice girl awhile ago... and that "girl" is clearly an adult as she is a lawyer. Thankfully most people don't look to get offended left and right, and it certainly doesn't help any in responses to make an issue out of a non issue.
Intellectually, it is easy to quickly discount someone who doesn't fit your preconceived checklist or requirements. But what you don't realize is that your checklist may be wrong! It certainly is not absolute...unless you're talking a list of 3 "dealbreakers" there are likely many things that could be offset by other good things so that you wouldn't really mind them or it would be so minor you'd not care in light of the other stuff.
But to find the offsetting stuff that could compensate for something that on the surface seems "bad", you have to spend a little more time with them. And everyone is sooooo afraid of "wasting" their time by going out with someone that won't be "the one". Well, even if they fit your intellectual checklist they still may not click with you for other reasons. So you have to stop trying to be so efficient by quickly discarding people and be a little more open to someone who's not perfect.
Brilliant reply. I think there are plenty of quality people out there who are being written off because of someone's checklist of what they believe are valid requirements.
The thing that really gets me is dating is the process of getting to know people to see if they're a good match for a relationship, yet so many people are trying to pre-screen the dating process. It doesn't work that way. You have to spend time with someone to know if there's a connection. It can't be pre-determined by a photo or profile words through OLD. You can't tell by looking at someone across a bar or ball field whether you'll be compatible. So much talk about not wanting to waste time, but time is exactly what it takes to meet people, determine their character and their compatibility. Trying to find the right match before getting to know the person, that is the waste of time.
This list is fine if you are just sport dating. If you only are capable of shallow relationships, that's fine, no judgments here. I'm more curious what your long term goals are, especially since you are dating "girls" - use of that word is always a give away.
I want real relationships. My list has character/core values compatibility and common goals at the top of the list. Then comes things like "likes to do the same things" since I want a companion at least some of the time who is into what I'm into. It was easier to find more guys worth dating when I changed my list, and found more into me that were compatible.
I also threw out age and some other criteria that was important at one time.
I don't think it's shallow at all. His list is nonspecific (in a good way), but for one person to meet that criteria can be tough. What would be shallow is, for example, ignoring incompatibilities because of physical attraction.
Of course there are similarities in power and oppression.
But girl isn't used in a denigrating way here, neither is boy.
Intent means A LOT.
A black man could rightly see being referred to as boy in a denigrating way in all cases. Same thing.
My motto is that the offense of a name call is in the eye of the person being called. You don't get to tell a black man how to feel about being called "boy" unless you are black. You don't get to tell a grown woman how to feel about being called "girl" unless you are a woman. Shrieking that it is not offensive does not make it so.
Intellectually, it is easy to quickly discount someone who doesn't fit your preconceived checklist or requirements. But what you don't realize is that your checklist may be wrong! It certainly is not absolute...unless you're talking a list of 3 "dealbreakers" there are likely many things that could be offset by other good things so that you wouldn't really mind them or it would be so minor you'd not care in light of the other stuff.
But to find the offsetting stuff that could compensate for something that on the surface seems "bad", you have to spend a little more time with them. And everyone is sooooo afraid of "wasting" their time by going out with someone that won't be "the one". Well, even if they fit your intellectual checklist they still may not click with you for other reasons. So you have to stop trying to be so efficient by quickly discarding people and be a little more open to someone who's not perfect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberty2011
Brilliant reply. I think there are plenty of quality people out there who are being written off because of someone's checklist of what they believe are valid requirements.
The thing that really gets me is dating is the process of getting to know people to see if they're a good match for a relationship, yet so many people are trying to pre-screen the dating process. It doesn't work that way. You have to spend time with someone to know if there's a connection. It can't be pre-determined by a photo or profile words through OLD. You can't tell by looking at someone across a bar or ball field whether you'll be compatible. So much talk about not wanting to waste time, but time is exactly what it takes to meet people, determine their character and their compatibility. Trying to find the right match before getting to know the person, that is the waste of time.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by somebodynew
A black man could rightly see being referred to as boy in a denigrating way in all cases. Same thing.
My motto is that the offense of a name call is in the eye of the person being called. You don't get to tell a black man how to feel about being called "boy" unless you are black. You don't get to tell a grown woman how to feel about being called "girl" unless you are a woman. Shrieking that it is not offensive does not make it so.
No, it doesn't make it so, but when someone is crying wolf at every little thing when there is clearly no animosity involved, it doesn't take long for everything that person is saying to become ignored and become background noise. People have the right to be offended whenever and however they wish to be offended, but just note that others will dismiss those cries of injustice and will even call that person out on their ridiculousness. If people want to be listened to and not dismissed, cry wolf when there is actually a wolf, and generally the wolf has intent.
Beyond that, no one in particular was being called a girl here. It wasn't to a specific person, it was a general pronoun. So there was no one on the receiving end that could legitimately take offense.
Shall we start feigning indignation when the term "boy" is used? I sure hell hope not.
Anyway, this is off topic enough.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
