Neglecting women in every field
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Why do we say 'chairman' for men and 'chairperson' for women? Why don't we use 'chairperson' for both?
It's a neutral word a single word can used for both.
Also, why do we use 'man-made' environment? Why don't we use 'human-made' instead?
vocabulary gender-neutral sociolinguistic
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Why do we say 'chairman' for men and 'chairperson' for women? Why don't we use 'chairperson' for both?
It's a neutral word a single word can used for both.
Also, why do we use 'man-made' environment? Why don't we use 'human-made' instead?
vocabulary gender-neutral sociolinguistic
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Excellent observation. about 'chairperson' and 'man-made'.
– Mitch
2 days ago
deleted 'editorial' question in original: "Why do we neglect females and other genders? They play an equal role in the world." This is an important motivation for the language question but really should be avoided in answers to keep it as opinion-free as possible.
– Mitch
2 days ago
2
We do use chairperson for both men and women. That's why it was introduced, in order to apply to both, equally. A role that is called a "chairperson" for a woman will still be called a "chairperson" for her successor, if he's a man, and vice versa, and every other combination. A role that is called a "chairman" for a man will be called a "chairwomen" for his successor if she's a woman. Etc. But I see more and more just dropping the second morpheme and calling it a "chair".
– Dan Bron
2 days ago
2
'Human' has the word 'man' in it. If society in general wishes to completely dissociate itself from the development of language, it will have to re-invent language altogether, from concept.
– Nigel J
2 days ago
1
@NigelJ: {mega applause} "Person" won't work, either: (horrors) it's got "son" in it! Etymology of "human": This is in part from PIE *(dh)ghomon-, literally "earthling, earthly being," as opposed to the gods (from root *dhghem- "earth") (as per etymon online)
– Wordster
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Why do we say 'chairman' for men and 'chairperson' for women? Why don't we use 'chairperson' for both?
It's a neutral word a single word can used for both.
Also, why do we use 'man-made' environment? Why don't we use 'human-made' instead?
vocabulary gender-neutral sociolinguistic
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Why do we say 'chairman' for men and 'chairperson' for women? Why don't we use 'chairperson' for both?
It's a neutral word a single word can used for both.
Also, why do we use 'man-made' environment? Why don't we use 'human-made' instead?
vocabulary gender-neutral sociolinguistic
vocabulary gender-neutral sociolinguistic
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
edited 2 days ago
Mitch
49.3k1598206
49.3k1598206
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
asked 2 days ago
Hammad Hassan khan
41
41
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Excellent observation. about 'chairperson' and 'man-made'.
– Mitch
2 days ago
deleted 'editorial' question in original: "Why do we neglect females and other genders? They play an equal role in the world." This is an important motivation for the language question but really should be avoided in answers to keep it as opinion-free as possible.
– Mitch
2 days ago
2
We do use chairperson for both men and women. That's why it was introduced, in order to apply to both, equally. A role that is called a "chairperson" for a woman will still be called a "chairperson" for her successor, if he's a man, and vice versa, and every other combination. A role that is called a "chairman" for a man will be called a "chairwomen" for his successor if she's a woman. Etc. But I see more and more just dropping the second morpheme and calling it a "chair".
– Dan Bron
2 days ago
2
'Human' has the word 'man' in it. If society in general wishes to completely dissociate itself from the development of language, it will have to re-invent language altogether, from concept.
– Nigel J
2 days ago
1
@NigelJ: {mega applause} "Person" won't work, either: (horrors) it's got "son" in it! Etymology of "human": This is in part from PIE *(dh)ghomon-, literally "earthling, earthly being," as opposed to the gods (from root *dhghem- "earth") (as per etymon online)
– Wordster
2 days ago
add a comment |
Excellent observation. about 'chairperson' and 'man-made'.
– Mitch
2 days ago
deleted 'editorial' question in original: "Why do we neglect females and other genders? They play an equal role in the world." This is an important motivation for the language question but really should be avoided in answers to keep it as opinion-free as possible.
– Mitch
2 days ago
2
We do use chairperson for both men and women. That's why it was introduced, in order to apply to both, equally. A role that is called a "chairperson" for a woman will still be called a "chairperson" for her successor, if he's a man, and vice versa, and every other combination. A role that is called a "chairman" for a man will be called a "chairwomen" for his successor if she's a woman. Etc. But I see more and more just dropping the second morpheme and calling it a "chair".
– Dan Bron
2 days ago
2
'Human' has the word 'man' in it. If society in general wishes to completely dissociate itself from the development of language, it will have to re-invent language altogether, from concept.
– Nigel J
2 days ago
1
@NigelJ: {mega applause} "Person" won't work, either: (horrors) it's got "son" in it! Etymology of "human": This is in part from PIE *(dh)ghomon-, literally "earthling, earthly being," as opposed to the gods (from root *dhghem- "earth") (as per etymon online)
– Wordster
2 days ago
Excellent observation. about 'chairperson' and 'man-made'.
– Mitch
2 days ago
Excellent observation. about 'chairperson' and 'man-made'.
– Mitch
2 days ago
deleted 'editorial' question in original: "Why do we neglect females and other genders? They play an equal role in the world." This is an important motivation for the language question but really should be avoided in answers to keep it as opinion-free as possible.
– Mitch
2 days ago
deleted 'editorial' question in original: "Why do we neglect females and other genders? They play an equal role in the world." This is an important motivation for the language question but really should be avoided in answers to keep it as opinion-free as possible.
– Mitch
2 days ago
2
2
We do use chairperson for both men and women. That's why it was introduced, in order to apply to both, equally. A role that is called a "chairperson" for a woman will still be called a "chairperson" for her successor, if he's a man, and vice versa, and every other combination. A role that is called a "chairman" for a man will be called a "chairwomen" for his successor if she's a woman. Etc. But I see more and more just dropping the second morpheme and calling it a "chair".
– Dan Bron
2 days ago
We do use chairperson for both men and women. That's why it was introduced, in order to apply to both, equally. A role that is called a "chairperson" for a woman will still be called a "chairperson" for her successor, if he's a man, and vice versa, and every other combination. A role that is called a "chairman" for a man will be called a "chairwomen" for his successor if she's a woman. Etc. But I see more and more just dropping the second morpheme and calling it a "chair".
– Dan Bron
2 days ago
2
2
'Human' has the word 'man' in it. If society in general wishes to completely dissociate itself from the development of language, it will have to re-invent language altogether, from concept.
– Nigel J
2 days ago
'Human' has the word 'man' in it. If society in general wishes to completely dissociate itself from the development of language, it will have to re-invent language altogether, from concept.
– Nigel J
2 days ago
1
1
@NigelJ: {mega applause} "Person" won't work, either: (horrors) it's got "son" in it! Etymology of "human": This is in part from PIE *(dh)ghomon-, literally "earthling, earthly being," as opposed to the gods (from root *dhghem- "earth") (as per etymon online)
– Wordster
2 days ago
@NigelJ: {mega applause} "Person" won't work, either: (horrors) it's got "son" in it! Etymology of "human": This is in part from PIE *(dh)ghomon-, literally "earthling, earthly being," as opposed to the gods (from root *dhghem- "earth") (as per etymon online)
– Wordster
2 days ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
'Chairman,' 'chairwoman,' and 'chairperson' are all acceptable and all in common use. Chairperson is not restricted to use with women, and the AP Stylebook (2013) recommends against it. It instead suggests 'Chairman' or 'Chairwoman' in all cases, except where 'Chairperson' is a person's official title.
Neither Merriam-Webster nor the AP Stylebook accept 'human-made' as an alternative to 'man-made,' but 'man-made' does not suffer from the same gendering problem as 'chairman' and 'chairwoman.' 'Man' originally meant just any person, and though the use of man alone to mean just any person is obsolete, the meaning persists in a number of words. The OED gives two examples that describe both Adam and Eve as men.
C1175 (OE) Homily (Bodl. 343) in S. Irvine Old Eng. Homilies (1993) 138 He [sc. the Devil] þam ereste men Adam and Euam..forcostode and biswaac.
1597 Bp. J. King Lect. Ionas xxxvi. 481 The Lord had but one paire of men in paradise.
For that reason I personally don't have a problem using 'man-made,' but one could use 'artificial,' 'synthetic,' or 'simulated' depending on the context to avoid the term.
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
'Chairman,' 'chairwoman,' and 'chairperson' are all acceptable and all in common use. Chairperson is not restricted to use with women, and the AP Stylebook (2013) recommends against it. It instead suggests 'Chairman' or 'Chairwoman' in all cases, except where 'Chairperson' is a person's official title.
Neither Merriam-Webster nor the AP Stylebook accept 'human-made' as an alternative to 'man-made,' but 'man-made' does not suffer from the same gendering problem as 'chairman' and 'chairwoman.' 'Man' originally meant just any person, and though the use of man alone to mean just any person is obsolete, the meaning persists in a number of words. The OED gives two examples that describe both Adam and Eve as men.
C1175 (OE) Homily (Bodl. 343) in S. Irvine Old Eng. Homilies (1993) 138 He [sc. the Devil] þam ereste men Adam and Euam..forcostode and biswaac.
1597 Bp. J. King Lect. Ionas xxxvi. 481 The Lord had but one paire of men in paradise.
For that reason I personally don't have a problem using 'man-made,' but one could use 'artificial,' 'synthetic,' or 'simulated' depending on the context to avoid the term.
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
'Chairman,' 'chairwoman,' and 'chairperson' are all acceptable and all in common use. Chairperson is not restricted to use with women, and the AP Stylebook (2013) recommends against it. It instead suggests 'Chairman' or 'Chairwoman' in all cases, except where 'Chairperson' is a person's official title.
Neither Merriam-Webster nor the AP Stylebook accept 'human-made' as an alternative to 'man-made,' but 'man-made' does not suffer from the same gendering problem as 'chairman' and 'chairwoman.' 'Man' originally meant just any person, and though the use of man alone to mean just any person is obsolete, the meaning persists in a number of words. The OED gives two examples that describe both Adam and Eve as men.
C1175 (OE) Homily (Bodl. 343) in S. Irvine Old Eng. Homilies (1993) 138 He [sc. the Devil] þam ereste men Adam and Euam..forcostode and biswaac.
1597 Bp. J. King Lect. Ionas xxxvi. 481 The Lord had but one paire of men in paradise.
For that reason I personally don't have a problem using 'man-made,' but one could use 'artificial,' 'synthetic,' or 'simulated' depending on the context to avoid the term.
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
'Chairman,' 'chairwoman,' and 'chairperson' are all acceptable and all in common use. Chairperson is not restricted to use with women, and the AP Stylebook (2013) recommends against it. It instead suggests 'Chairman' or 'Chairwoman' in all cases, except where 'Chairperson' is a person's official title.
Neither Merriam-Webster nor the AP Stylebook accept 'human-made' as an alternative to 'man-made,' but 'man-made' does not suffer from the same gendering problem as 'chairman' and 'chairwoman.' 'Man' originally meant just any person, and though the use of man alone to mean just any person is obsolete, the meaning persists in a number of words. The OED gives two examples that describe both Adam and Eve as men.
C1175 (OE) Homily (Bodl. 343) in S. Irvine Old Eng. Homilies (1993) 138 He [sc. the Devil] þam ereste men Adam and Euam..forcostode and biswaac.
1597 Bp. J. King Lect. Ionas xxxvi. 481 The Lord had but one paire of men in paradise.
For that reason I personally don't have a problem using 'man-made,' but one could use 'artificial,' 'synthetic,' or 'simulated' depending on the context to avoid the term.
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
'Chairman,' 'chairwoman,' and 'chairperson' are all acceptable and all in common use. Chairperson is not restricted to use with women, and the AP Stylebook (2013) recommends against it. It instead suggests 'Chairman' or 'Chairwoman' in all cases, except where 'Chairperson' is a person's official title.
Neither Merriam-Webster nor the AP Stylebook accept 'human-made' as an alternative to 'man-made,' but 'man-made' does not suffer from the same gendering problem as 'chairman' and 'chairwoman.' 'Man' originally meant just any person, and though the use of man alone to mean just any person is obsolete, the meaning persists in a number of words. The OED gives two examples that describe both Adam and Eve as men.
C1175 (OE) Homily (Bodl. 343) in S. Irvine Old Eng. Homilies (1993) 138 He [sc. the Devil] þam ereste men Adam and Euam..forcostode and biswaac.
1597 Bp. J. King Lect. Ionas xxxvi. 481 The Lord had but one paire of men in paradise.
For that reason I personally don't have a problem using 'man-made,' but one could use 'artificial,' 'synthetic,' or 'simulated' depending on the context to avoid the term.
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
answered 2 days ago
eenbeetje
1055
1055
add a comment |
add a comment |
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Hammad Hassan khan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f473286%2fneglecting-women-in-every-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Excellent observation. about 'chairperson' and 'man-made'.
– Mitch
2 days ago
deleted 'editorial' question in original: "Why do we neglect females and other genders? They play an equal role in the world." This is an important motivation for the language question but really should be avoided in answers to keep it as opinion-free as possible.
– Mitch
2 days ago
2
We do use chairperson for both men and women. That's why it was introduced, in order to apply to both, equally. A role that is called a "chairperson" for a woman will still be called a "chairperson" for her successor, if he's a man, and vice versa, and every other combination. A role that is called a "chairman" for a man will be called a "chairwomen" for his successor if she's a woman. Etc. But I see more and more just dropping the second morpheme and calling it a "chair".
– Dan Bron
2 days ago
2
'Human' has the word 'man' in it. If society in general wishes to completely dissociate itself from the development of language, it will have to re-invent language altogether, from concept.
– Nigel J
2 days ago
1
@NigelJ: {mega applause} "Person" won't work, either: (horrors) it's got "son" in it! Etymology of "human": This is in part from PIE *(dh)ghomon-, literally "earthling, earthly being," as opposed to the gods (from root *dhghem- "earth") (as per etymon online)
– Wordster
2 days ago