Of course we’re animals, but let’s use some common sense wrt cultural norms here. A dog of mixed lineage is mutt, but it’s completely inappropriate to refer to a multiracial person as such. A female dog is a removed, a male is a stud; the sexism is pretty obvious when applied to humans. It’s fine to talk about owning a dog; it’s not ok to talk about owning another human (except perhaps children, in certain contexts).
Yes, we are animals too, but that doesn’t mean we should talk about each other in the same way. (And I say this as a vegetarian who thinks we should treat all animals with significantly more respect than we currently do.)
But surely if male/female is appropriate for EVERY OTHER ANIMAL, we’re a bit silly to exclude ourselves.
The “mutt,” “removed,” and “stud” examples aren’t all purpose and therefore aren’t germane - you’d be using words for a specific species. That’d be weird.
It’s completely context dependent; you’re right that using male/female is appropriate for humans in certain contexts, e.g., medical usage (“Patient, a 47yo female, presented with…”). But it is — for cultural and historical reasons — generally considered inappropriate to refer to our fellow humans that way in conversation.
Re: mutt, fair enough. removed/stud are examples of how animal terms, when applied to humans, take on very different meanings. Purebred is afaik not specific to species, but it is wildly inappropriate to refer to people as such.
At the end of the day, the logic behind what is and is not appropriate has history behind it; animal terms have been used extensively to refer to subjugated peoples; it may be scientifically accurate but that doesn’t mean that it’s inoffensive.
I’m completely on board with language evolving, and usage changing. Perhaps this is a case of that. I’m not sure yet; it may not be.
I know there are vocal people who WANT that to be the case. Are there enough to tip the scales and change general usage? Dunno. Also, there doesn’t seem to be a ready alternative for now.
Humans not being animals and all…
Of course we’re animals, but let’s use some common sense wrt cultural norms here. A dog of mixed lineage is mutt, but it’s completely inappropriate to refer to a multiracial person as such. A female dog is a removed, a male is a stud; the sexism is pretty obvious when applied to humans. It’s fine to talk about owning a dog; it’s not ok to talk about owning another human (except perhaps children, in certain contexts).
Yes, we are animals too, but that doesn’t mean we should talk about each other in the same way. (And I say this as a vegetarian who thinks we should treat all animals with significantly more respect than we currently do.)
But surely if male/female is appropriate for EVERY OTHER ANIMAL, we’re a bit silly to exclude ourselves.
The “mutt,” “removed,” and “stud” examples aren’t all purpose and therefore aren’t germane - you’d be using words for a specific species. That’d be weird.
It’s completely context dependent; you’re right that using male/female is appropriate for humans in certain contexts, e.g., medical usage (“Patient, a 47yo female, presented with…”). But it is — for cultural and historical reasons — generally considered inappropriate to refer to our fellow humans that way in conversation.
Re: mutt, fair enough. removed/stud are examples of how animal terms, when applied to humans, take on very different meanings. Purebred is afaik not specific to species, but it is wildly inappropriate to refer to people as such.
At the end of the day, the logic behind what is and is not appropriate has history behind it; animal terms have been used extensively to refer to subjugated peoples; it may be scientifically accurate but that doesn’t mean that it’s inoffensive.
Nicely put.
I’m completely on board with language evolving, and usage changing. Perhaps this is a case of that. I’m not sure yet; it may not be.
I know there are vocal people who WANT that to be the case. Are there enough to tip the scales and change general usage? Dunno. Also, there doesn’t seem to be a ready alternative for now.