Important question

HybridX said:
Is a female superhero a superheroine?
Click to expand...


No, because the word "hero" is not gendered. It's like "Author" or "Actor": the reason a female version of the word exists is purely down to sexism. The only time there needs to be different word for the female version is when the noun includes things like "-man"
 
Meridian said:
No, because the word "hero" is not gendered. It's like "Author" or "Actor": the reason a female version of the word exists is purely down to sexism. The only time there needs to be different word for the female version is when the noun includes things like "-man"
Click to expand...

Well, it is gendered by definition. "Typically a man" in the oxford dictionary. Simply "a man" in Collins and others.

"Chairman", on the other hand, is neutral despite the "man" in the word

Also, "human"
 
cheesyboy said:
Well, it is gendered by definition. "Typically a man" in the oxford dictionary. Simply "a man" in Collins and others.
Click to expand...


Do you understand what "sexism" means? Would you recognise it? Because you've just given a great example. To say that a word is gendered is not the same thing as saying that role is gendered. The vast majority of brick-layers may be male, so the role is gendered. But the word "brick-layer" is not gendered. However, your example of "chairman" clearly is a gendered word, as it automatically makes anyone holding that post a man. Which is why the word used these days is usually just "chair" (I'll agree that "chairperson" is clunking, but blame it on the English language). Women quite rightly object to using the word "chairman" when the person concerned is female. But it means that you need a word which is either not gendered (like "chair") or a special word for the female version ("chairwoman"). You need no such linguistic silliness for "superhero", which is perfectly adequate to describe Wonderwoman and Superman. The fact that the majority of superheros are male is a completely different sexist issue.
 
Meridian said:
Do you understand what "sexism" means? Would you recognise it? Because you've just given a great example. To say that a word is gendered is not the same thing as saying that role is gendered. The vast majority of brick-layers may be male, so the role is gendered. But the word "brick-layer" is not gendered. However, your example of "chairman" clearly is a gendered word, as it automatically makes anyone holding that post a man. Which is why the word used these days is usually just "chair" (I'll agree that "chairperson" is clunking, but blame it on the English language). Women quite rightly object to using the word "chairman" when the person concerned is female. But it means that you need a word which is either not gendered (like "chair") or a special word for the female version ("chairwoman"). You need no such linguistic silliness for "superhero", which is perfectly adequate to describe Wonderwoman and Superman. The fact that the majority of superheros are male is a completely different sexist issue.
Click to expand...
Well, yes. But my point was that the word "hero" is actually defined as being in respect of a man.

And the word Chairman is actually a unisex word, by definition - i.e. it is (and always has been) for use regardless of whether you be a man or woman.

The word "superhero" is unisex by definition. Despite one of its constituents ("hero") being masculine.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom