view the rest of the comments
No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
To add on, I've found that referring to women as "females" in anything other than formal or scientific contexts has adopted something of a sour taste in recent years. The practice is often associated with incel/misogynistic behavior and ideology, probably because it implicitly strips women of their personhood and reduces them to their sex. Put another way, both a female dog and a female human could be called a "female", but only one could be called a "woman".
That's my own two cents though, take them with a grain of salt.
That's kind of the opposite. You're talking about using "female" as a noun instead of an adjective. And for sure, don't do that to refer to humans! But it's perfectly normal and correct as an adjective.
Yes, that is if you turn "female" into a noun, which does sound weird and dehumanizing, but using "women" as an adjective just sounds incorrect. Maybe people do that because they try to avoid saying "female" at all costs to avoid being accused of misogyny or dehumanization.
I recognize that "female" is sometimes taken this way now, but I seem to remember a time when it was the use of "woman" as an adjective that seemed more problematic. I grew up watching TV reruns from the 50s & 60s, and in shows from that era, you'd hear characters intended to be seen as sexist railing about "women drivers", "women reporters", etc. To my (admittedly young) ear, part of the insult or intended derision in these terms came from the intentional clunkiness of the terms. As no one would say "man driver" or "man reporter", it made the phrase "woman driver" seem unnatural, and by extension then the idea of a woman driver unnatural. If the characters had used the more clinical sounding "female driver", it would likely only come off as equivalent to "male driver", and so lose much of its punch.
I realize that there is now some ick associated with some uses of the word female, but if efforts aren't made to reclaim it, I think we are doomed to it becoming strictly pejorative - and who wants that?
In my writing, if I'm going to refer to someone as "female" it's usually because I'm also going to refer to someone else as "male" in that same context.
This new trend is kind of annoying because I wrote a book about sapient magical sugar gliders and since they're not humans, I referred to them as "male" and "female". That made the writing feel way too parochial and, well, awful so I came up with special words for male and female children and adults for the species instead.
Young females were called "kaydees" and the males were "keedos". The species as a whole was named "kads".
I actually had a reader say it was "a bad smell" that I used the word "female" too often (they did a search for that but not "male", sigh).
I mean, there's also historical context to be considered here. Throughout history (and still today in many places) women have been treated as subhuman, or at least as lesser to men; in many cultures, married women were literally considered the chattel of their husbands. In that context, using the term "female" which almost explicitly carries no connotations of personhood feels a lot more like a hateful slur. I don't think "male" really carries that same historical baggage, though.
In that context you'd probably laugh if they used man too.