I know by your comment history you probably didn’t mean it this way, but when most people hear someone referring to “females” they think they’re bring deliberately dehumanized like the kind of person who follows Andrew Tate would do.
I sincerely mean this, but I feel bad for people that in my opinion are paranoid about some hidden agenda. If someone says something to me using language and words that I understand then I believe what they are saying is exactly what they are trying to convey to me. If they use a word in the dictionary that we all learned in grammar school, no additional definition is needed. I would hate to go through life constantly suspecting that what a person was clearly saying to me wasn’t “really” what they meant. Though I guess if a person’s start point is always focused on being “dehumanized” then they will use that filter to be suspect of everyone that they interact with. And I’m sure that this comment clearly shows that I don’t hate any group of people nor am I condescending to them will itself be viewed negatively.
So you refuse to understand anything more complex than the surface. How lost are you when you watch a movie? When Micheal Corleone says “I’ll make him an offer he can’t refuse” are you just like, “That’s pretty nice of him to offer a business deal that’s so favorable he’ll accept it, I thought these guys were rivals.”
Missing the entire point dude. No one is being paranoid about an agenda. That would suggest that people are being unreasonable in their assumption about you using females as a term for women. But about 95% of the time any woman hears themselves being called a “female” it’s some incel crap and they’re about to be talked down to and dehumanized which is the entire point of calling them female.
And this isn’t meant for you to take offense to and become defensive. We get you didn’t mean it that way or whatever. People here are trying to help you not sound like an incel or red pill douchebag. If you want to continue using that word and have people make incorrect assumptions about you, go for it.
IMHO “males” is also dehumanising, but I digress. When used in the derogatory sense “females” is often beside “men,” implying that women are inferior to men. It’s become somewhat of a “dog-whistle,” which is a form of coded language that the speaker uses to imply a different message to a specific audience (usually some sort of bigotry) while maintaining plausable deniability. Someone may purposely use “females” to refer to women to indicate their own misogyny to people who share their beliefs, and it is intentially ambiguous to prevent women who pick up on it from calling it out. Tmk “males” isn’t commonly loaded in the same way
Because there isn’t a large, surprisingly homogeneous group of midandrists frequently using the term “males” while promoting unhinged criticism of men.
The problem is incels use female to dehumanize and reduce women. That is where its use is popularized from and i can tell you that 95+% of the time i hear someone use female to describe a woman, outside of a clinical setting or paper, they are an incel. Some people like you may not be aware, or care, that this is how it is typically used but that doesn’t make it any less offensive. That isn’t someone being “paranoid” and starting with thinking things are dehumanizing. It is -literally- how the term was intended to be used in the context you’re using it.
Imagine going up to someone and calling them an derogatory term and then telling them they are just being paranoid for being offended. If you don’t see the problem in that then i hope you can reflect on that and what this says about you.
I am totally UNAWARE of what you are describing. If I actually understood the point that you were making I wouldn’t think those who objected were paranoid.
Subtle changes in diction can sometimes dramatically impact how your message is interpreted. Language evolves, and words can take on additional (perfecly valid) meaning over time that are only added to a dictionary after being well-established. This can cause misunderstandings, as demonstrated in this thread. I’m sure you have no negative intentions, but to many it does not seem that way. The takeaway is that a small change in phrasing or words can decide how effectively your meaning is communicated, even if you are unaware of it.
Language is messy, and consists of mutual understandings of what a given “word” means. In this case, the hidden negative connotation in “females” is causing you to be misunderstood. I believe using “woman” instead would reflect what you meant without causing anybody to be uncomfortable. Best regards
Most times my judgment of dishonesty based on dogwhistles is accurate. This isn’t the bogeyman, it’s the norm for conversation, you’re the exception.
If someone says a slur to me, sure they might mean the best, but 95% of the time a slur means they’re being a dick. So I’m gonna tell good-meaning people to stop using that slur, or they’re gonna get grouped in with the 95% by someone at some point.
(Not saying that “female” is a slur, but 95% of the time someone uses it they way you did they’ve got some misogyny)
You can interpret words literally. However human organisms use literal interpretation and context to communicate meaning without saying it literally.
In the original comment saying MOST females won’t get the joke is incorrect in a literal interpretation.
Furthermore the use of “female” with this literal statement in MOST people’s interpretation is commonly associated with sexist (doesn’t have to be hate, just dislike in general) attitudes against women. (The quote “women, am I right?” Comes to mind as a similar sentiment.)
This interpretation is learnt by everyone whom exist outside of the internet and is learnt from society to prevent conflict and unwanted hate, there’s no need to feel paranoia about reading it when the literal text and common interpretation of the text reads as a degrading attack on MOST females. (The meme touch grass is intended for instances like this.)
I have lived with one for many years and still trying to figure out how she thinks. I’m not saying that a male brain is better. But it’s definitely different. My number one example is…if I want something I come right out and ask her. But many times if she wants something I’m supposed to be Kreskin and magically know what she wants.
If you meant people who are biologically female since trans women would be more likely to understand male anatomy jokes, “female folks” or “afab folks” would probably feel a bit less like they’re being reduced to their sexual organs, and are being seen more as people, which folks always appreciate :)
Words man. They aren’t all insults. Sometimes it’s ancillary, just trying to convey information. We’re majoring in the minors. It’s a dirty joke. You’re worried about the group pronoun they’re using? I agree female has a little bit of the m’lady feel to it. But come on, let’s overlook that.
Unless we want to use group pronouns like we do with animals. A herd of cows. A murder of crows. An annoyance of pronoun correctors.
Unless we want to use group pronouns like we do with animals.
I’m pretty sure that’s exactly why referring to women as “females” is problematic — using male/female as nouns is fine for animals. Humans, not so much…
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 bitch, 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,” “bitch,” 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. Bitch/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.
I felt like cooking up a reply because you might be the same as me - I thought the genders were flipped, and I couldn’t understand what the girl was saving up. Since it is a guy, and going by the fact that the OP made it look like it was something that “only guys would know” I’m assuming it has something to do with penis. Going off of that, the only thing that I can think of is “saving up cum” since, as far as I know, the longer a man abstains, the stronger his orgasms, and the more ejaculate is expelled?
I didn’t find it funny though. Either this is not my type of humour, either I misunderstood the joke.
Maybe I’m the same as you and my reply contributed nothing to the discussion ;)
Wonder how many females actually understand the joke
yeah you definitely are around women usually 😂
I know by your comment history you probably didn’t mean it this way, but when most people hear someone referring to “females” they think they’re bring deliberately dehumanized like the kind of person who follows Andrew Tate would do.
female women
I sincerely mean this, but I feel bad for people that in my opinion are paranoid about some hidden agenda. If someone says something to me using language and words that I understand then I believe what they are saying is exactly what they are trying to convey to me. If they use a word in the dictionary that we all learned in grammar school, no additional definition is needed. I would hate to go through life constantly suspecting that what a person was clearly saying to me wasn’t “really” what they meant. Though I guess if a person’s start point is always focused on being “dehumanized” then they will use that filter to be suspect of everyone that they interact with. And I’m sure that this comment clearly shows that I don’t hate any group of people nor am I condescending to them will itself be viewed negatively.
C’mon, you’re smarter than that
So you refuse to understand anything more complex than the surface. How lost are you when you watch a movie? When Micheal Corleone says “I’ll make him an offer he can’t refuse” are you just like, “That’s pretty nice of him to offer a business deal that’s so favorable he’ll accept it, I thought these guys were rivals.”
Missing the entire point dude. No one is being paranoid about an agenda. That would suggest that people are being unreasonable in their assumption about you using females as a term for women. But about 95% of the time any woman hears themselves being called a “female” it’s some incel crap and they’re about to be talked down to and dehumanized which is the entire point of calling them female.
And this isn’t meant for you to take offense to and become defensive. We get you didn’t mean it that way or whatever. People here are trying to help you not sound like an incel or red pill douchebag. If you want to continue using that word and have people make incorrect assumptions about you, go for it.
serious question. Why don’t males ever find it offensive to be called males?
Because males as a term had not picked up culturally loaded meaning from those who would exploit them.
Why aren’t males putting their keys between their fingers when they go out in the dark?
IMHO “males” is also dehumanising, but I digress. When used in the derogatory sense “females” is often beside “men,” implying that women are inferior to men. It’s become somewhat of a “dog-whistle,” which is a form of coded language that the speaker uses to imply a different message to a specific audience (usually some sort of bigotry) while maintaining plausable deniability. Someone may purposely use “females” to refer to women to indicate their own misogyny to people who share their beliefs, and it is intentially ambiguous to prevent women who pick up on it from calling it out. Tmk “males” isn’t commonly loaded in the same way
Because there isn’t a large, surprisingly homogeneous group of midandrists frequently using the term “males” while promoting unhinged criticism of men.
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B32xNWM3eAk) because we get called worse things.
The problem is incels use female to dehumanize and reduce women. That is where its use is popularized from and i can tell you that 95+% of the time i hear someone use female to describe a woman, outside of a clinical setting or paper, they are an incel. Some people like you may not be aware, or care, that this is how it is typically used but that doesn’t make it any less offensive. That isn’t someone being “paranoid” and starting with thinking things are dehumanizing. It is -literally- how the term was intended to be used in the context you’re using it.
Imagine going up to someone and calling them an derogatory term and then telling them they are just being paranoid for being offended. If you don’t see the problem in that then i hope you can reflect on that and what this says about you.
I am totally UNAWARE of what you are describing. If I actually understood the point that you were making I wouldn’t think those who objected were paranoid.
Subtle changes in diction can sometimes dramatically impact how your message is interpreted. Language evolves, and words can take on additional (perfecly valid) meaning over time that are only added to a dictionary after being well-established. This can cause misunderstandings, as demonstrated in this thread. I’m sure you have no negative intentions, but to many it does not seem that way. The takeaway is that a small change in phrasing or words can decide how effectively your meaning is communicated, even if you are unaware of it. Language is messy, and consists of mutual understandings of what a given “word” means. In this case, the hidden negative connotation in “females” is causing you to be misunderstood. I believe using “woman” instead would reflect what you meant without causing anybody to be uncomfortable. Best regards
Most times my judgment of dishonesty based on dogwhistles is accurate. This isn’t the bogeyman, it’s the norm for conversation, you’re the exception.
If someone says a slur to me, sure they might mean the best, but 95% of the time a slur means they’re being a dick. So I’m gonna tell good-meaning people to stop using that slur, or they’re gonna get grouped in with the 95% by someone at some point.
(Not saying that “female” is a slur, but 95% of the time someone uses it they way you did they’ve got some misogyny)
You can interpret words literally. However human organisms use literal interpretation and context to communicate meaning without saying it literally. In the original comment saying MOST females won’t get the joke is incorrect in a literal interpretation. Furthermore the use of “female” with this literal statement in MOST people’s interpretation is commonly associated with sexist (doesn’t have to be hate, just dislike in general) attitudes against women. (The quote “women, am I right?” Comes to mind as a similar sentiment.) This interpretation is learnt by everyone whom exist outside of the internet and is learnt from society to prevent conflict and unwanted hate, there’s no need to feel paranoia about reading it when the literal text and common interpretation of the text reads as a degrading attack on MOST females. (The meme touch grass is intended for instances like this.)
Me when words have a context gained through their use by other people:
How old are you? Of course women understand the joke. You should try hanging out with them.
I have lived with one for many years and still trying to figure out how she thinks. I’m not saying that a male brain is better. But it’s definitely different. My number one example is…if I want something I come right out and ask her. But many times if she wants something I’m supposed to be Kreskin and magically know what she wants.
You should just ask your mom to communicate her thoughts better
That’s social conditioning, not biology.
If gf/wife paying attention when she’s doing things can give you insight into what she wants, if that fails just ask her communicate literally.
Can we maybe skip calling people “females”…? 😅
If you meant people who are biologically female since trans women would be more likely to understand male anatomy jokes, “female folks” or “afab folks” would probably feel a bit less like they’re being reduced to their sexual organs, and are being seen more as people, which folks always appreciate :)
Chicks? Gals? Women? Dames? Ladies? Sheilas? Lassies?
Words man. They aren’t all insults. Sometimes it’s ancillary, just trying to convey information. We’re majoring in the minors. It’s a dirty joke. You’re worried about the group pronoun they’re using? I agree female has a little bit of the m’lady feel to it. But come on, let’s overlook that.
Unless we want to use group pronouns like we do with animals. A herd of cows. A murder of crows. An annoyance of pronoun correctors.
I’m pretty sure that’s exactly why referring to women as “females” is problematic — using male/female as nouns is fine for animals. Humans, not so much…
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 bitch, 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,” “bitch,” 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. Bitch/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.
Never seen a guy complain about being called a male though.
Nobody uses male the way incels use female
Even with the above point in mind, I would still find it odd if someone referred to me as male
Maybe because they’re not the ones being subjugated with the language?
Idk maybe all that understand implication, maybe the vast majority? Not sure just a theory, a game theory.
I’m a dude and I don’t get it.
He is saving up his cums so later if they have sex, he’ll do a big cum.
Like a 5lb white catfish.
Stay pure with the mind brother!
I felt like cooking up a reply because you might be the same as me - I thought the genders were flipped, and I couldn’t understand what the girl was saving up. Since it is a guy, and going by the fact that the OP made it look like it was something that “only guys would know” I’m assuming it has something to do with penis. Going off of that, the only thing that I can think of is “saving up cum” since, as far as I know, the longer a man abstains, the stronger his orgasms, and the more ejaculate is expelled?
I didn’t find it funny though. Either this is not my type of humour, either I misunderstood the joke.
Maybe I’m the same as you and my reply contributed nothing to the discussion ;)
Sent it to my wife and she laughed scornfully.