Gender biases

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by xilman

My knowledge of Romansh and Romanian is too frgamentary (sic) for me to comment meaningfully. Perhaps LaurV can help out.

Romanian grammar, same as German (and in spite of the Romanian language being ~80% Latin), comes from Greek. Nouns have three genders, every noun has a (mandatory) gender (i.e. no genderless nouns, like other languages have), and, same as German, the grammatical gender doesn't reflect the biological or whatever gender, but the gender is given by the way the word "sounds" to your ears. You have to learn the genders by heart, even as a native you won't always know the gender, unless you "count" the nouns - counting is different for all three genders, and it gives you the gender. For example, table (piece of furniture) is female (a table, two tables is "o masă, două mese"), and chair is neutral ("un scaun, două scaune"), while chicken is masculine ("un pui, doi pui"). Head (discussed above in the thread) is a strange exception, the anatomy-related one, as well as anything meaning "end" (the ends of a stick) is neutral ("un cap, două capuri/capete"), but head (leader) is male (albeit the singular word is the same "un cap, doi capi").

Edit: (continued reading the thread) also, regarding "they", we have feminine/masculine version for "they" or "them" (which must be used like that, differentiated, otherwise the sentences sound crappy) but not for "their", which is common for males and females. We say "ele scriu" (they write) for a bunch of women/girls, but if the bunch are all men, or it includes at least one man, regardless of the fact that there are another one million women in the bunch, then it is "ei scriu". But "their writing" is "scrisul lor" regardless of the group composition, all men, or all women. Strange world...

Edit 2: on the other hand, even more strange, some languages, like Thai (which I am struggling to speak, living here in Thailand for almost 21 years), would have common words for pronouns for all the genders and persons, EXCEPT for the FIRST person singular. Yes, it is not a joke, if you are a male (or consider yourself a male, regardless of biological gender), you have to refer to yourself (i.e. "I", "me", "mine", "myself") as "pom" but if you are female (or consider yourself so, regardless of biological gender), you would refer to yourself as "di-chan". Now, THAT is strange! Imagine all English speaking males would say "I" in sentences, but all females would say "Sy" (pronounced like by, but with s instead of b). But you still call everybody "you", and "it" (no "she" or "he" allowed).

Edit 3: (unintentionally coming out as a funny joke) Mandarin Chinese (which I also speak) neither have plurals, they add "men" (pronounced "măn") to the singular forms, as a plural "particle", i.e. "I/me" is "wo", but "we" is "women". (no pun intended, haha, it just came out like that, without previous thinking - so all Chinese refer to themselves as "women" ).

[Uncwilly]

"Our language" is the way we speak. Not which is any individual's language that they first learned. I think that that was quite clear from the beginning. Any attempts to divert this into issues about language origins and different languages is a dodge of the issue.

In school if a student is told to watch their language, in many, if not most circumstances, it is not about grammar.

Languages that have gender for objects, have that, that is the current state. There are movements to eliminate that. Other than to satisfy the current rules of the language does it really serve any utility?

One can say things like "Information Technology Department Technician". That does not imply the gender of the individual, even if the work 'Technician' has a grammatical gender in some language. Choosing to use terms that don't imply a gender (in those languages where it can be avoided) is a way for the speaker to show that the role does not in and of it self require a person of a specific gender.

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by Runtime Error

Would this woke thread be an appropriate place to discuss that the project itself does not have the most politically correct name?

There was a thread from 2018-2019 It went off in a not so great direction. Consider GIMPS as an initialism that morphed in to an acronym.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

One can say things like "Information Technology Department Technician". That does not imply the gender of the individual

Yes, this is one area where languages differ widely.
Separate words for the same profession depending on gender of the person
(such as actor/actress in English) are far more common in German, for example.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

One can say things like "Information Technology Department Technician". That does not imply the gender of the individual, even if the work 'Technician' has a grammatical gender in some language. Choosing to use terms that don't imply a gender (in those languages where it can be avoided) is a way for the speaker to show that the role does not in and of it self require a person of a specific gender.

But that is the whole point of the discussion!

In many languages it is quite literally impossible to specify a "technician" without also specifying a male technician or a female technician. English speakers such as yourself can use the word "doctor" without specifying the sex of the doctor. In Spanish you simply do not have the choice. You use either médico or médica, each of which unambiguously specifies their sex.

Once more: there is no such thing as "our" language in a global forum.

[pinhodecarlos]

Originally Posted by xilman

But that is the whole point of the discussion!

In many languages it is quite literally impossible to specify a "technician" without also specifying a male technician or a female technician. English speakers such as yourself can use the word "doctor" without specifying the sex of the doctor. In Spanish you simply do not have the choice. You use either médico or médica, each of which unambiguously specifies their sex.

Once more: there is no such thing as "our" language in a global forum.

It can almost be an insult calling médica to a médico and vice-versa.

[Uncwilly]

The language used in >99% of posts in this forum is English. This de facto "our language" does not carry the same level of required genderism that other languages do. And for those that do, there have been moves to undo that.
https://www.npr.org/2019/12/08/78613...gender-neutral
https://www.vengaglobal.com/blog/rem...nish-language/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...-around-world/

Languages can and do change over time to serve the needs of the users.

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Languages can and do change over time to serve the needs of the users.

And users of a given language clearly having widely varying needs and wants, so such changes in common-and-acceptable usage should not be rammed down the throats of everyone by a vocal minority.

Like xilman (if I am correctly recalling his statement way-too-many-pages-ago-for-this-short-an-elapsed-timespan), I am firmly in the "when i comes to righting historic wrongs, behavior matters much more than verbiage" camp. For example, to the poster who brought up the "can't we change the initialism GIMPS for the project to something more PC?" issue, I would ask "what have you actually done to help the handicapped in the past week?"

I'm not religious, but this bible passage seems apt. I'm quite confident that there are similar passages in the holy texts of many major religions.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

Like xilman (if I am correctly recalling his statement way-too-many-pages-ago-for-this-short-an-elapsed-timespan), I am firmly in the "when i comes to righting historic wrongs, behavior matters much more than verbiage" camp.

Credit where credit is due: whilst The Unspeakable One originated that saying, I am to blame for expressing support.

An aphorism of mine is that Offence is in the mind of the offended.

If you, being non-religious, would like a secular statement perhaps one of my favourites would suit: Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. A different message, to be sure, but I happen to think it appropriate here.

Apologies for the repeated use of English there, despite "our" language apparently being American. I am not trying to ram it down your throat and I am quite sure that you are easily capable of translating it to your local dialect without taking any unintended offence. I just don't feel the need right now to change my language to placate any Americans reading this text.

[Dr Sardonicus]

I note that, in the legal area of wills, the person managing the estate of a deceased person had for a long time, been known in the good ol' USA as the executor; or, as things progressed, and it became possible for women to be that person, executrix to denote a "female executor." Nowadays, the term "Personal Representative" has been adopted. This dispenses with any reference to gender. The term has long been in use as a synonym for "lawyer."

I don't have any problem with using "Neanderthal" terms like "policeman" or "mailman" because I know perfectly well that, nowadays, they can be women (Hurray!). And I don't have any trouble with "gender conflicted" statements like "She's a policeman" or "She's the mailman."

Of course, such usage requires the understanding that a woman can fill a "male-gender terminology designated" position. I'll take that understanding over cumbersome "gender neutral" terminology any day.

I have also been heard to say, "Yessir, Ma'am!" to indicate my agreement, acquiescence, or respect to a woman, and if any of them has been offended, they have certainly hidden it well, generally behind smiles.

I don't like the term "letter carrier" because >ahem< mailmen deliver items besides letters (such as packages). Obvious gender-specific designations for "lady mailmen" don't scan: Mail-lady? Mail-woman? Uh-uh. Try asking a lady mailman "Are you a mail lady?" if you dare!

Originally Posted by retina

What should I do with my peacock?

Peacocks are specifically males, usually of the species Pavo cristatus (but also Pavo muticus or Afropavo congensis), all known, without reference to gender, as "peafowl." The females are known as peahens.

The only consideration in keeping peacocks that comes immediately to mind as possibly being anyone else's business is that they, like roosters, can be quite loud. If your neighbors complain about the noise, you'll have to get rid of it. The frying pan would be one option.

[kriesel]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

The only consideration in keeping peacocks that comes immediately to mind as possibly being anyone else's business is that they, like roosters, can be quite loud. If your neighbors complain about the noise, you'll have to get rid of it. The frying pan would be one option.

I know someone whose neighbor let her animals run loose regularly. Her roving peacocks did $1500 damage to a car's finish in a single event, after entering the car owner's garage. The irresponsible animal-owner tried to blame the car owner, for having left the garage door open! And not surprisingly, the dolt was concerned about her insurance carrier dropping her if there was another claim. Same neighbor's cats damaged the homeowner's patio screen. Same neighbor's horse ran across a rain-softened lawn damaging the sod.