Too bad it doesn't cause infertility. Then we could improve the species -and- get our entertainment at the same time.

So, what exactly did he "win"?

They are just eating normal chilis and getting that reaction? They should have gone for habanero or piri piri...

This is posted for the world to see...who says it won't prevent fertilization?>> ^Stormsinger:

Too bad it doesn't cause infertility. Then we could improve the species -and- get our entertainment at the same time.

BTW, the guy on the left has stupid hair.

LOL from 3:15 - 3:30

Once the level of capsaicin in the chili peppers gets high enough, milk is no longer strong enough to counter act it. I suspect that is why they each drink about a quart of milk but are so obviously still in pain.

For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

>> ^bareboards2:

For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

This is why everyone hates feminists.

Note to self from the past: Do not store bottles or cans of jalapenos in the fridge anywhere where they might fall out due to opening the fridge violently or too quickly. That is how I once got jalapeno juice in my eye. And it sucked.

I'm embarrassed to come from the same country as these three. Please believe me when I say some of us have some balls.

Everyone? No. Men who think that they are the center of universe (and the women who agree with them)? Probably.

Here's something.... Open your mind just a tad little bit. Let in a new thought. Test it out. See if something might change if you took a moment to change your perspective.


>> ^gorillaman:

>> ^bareboards2:
For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

This is why everyone hates feminists.

... am I the only one who thought these guys were gay?

>> ^Stormsinger:

Too bad it doesn't cause infertility. Then we could improve the species -and- get our entertainment at the same time.

>> ^bamdrew:

... am I the only one who thought these guys were gay?



I have a nasty feeling these are metrosexuals. Might be gay - might be straight. Don't matter either way - give them 3 chillies and they act like bitches on heat (I mean the dogs).

Sooo, what are they going to do with the rest of those chilies?

>> ^zaust:

>> ^bamdrew:
... am I the only one who thought these guys were gay?

I have a nasty feeling these are metrosexuals. Might be gay - might be straight. Don't matter either way - give them 3 chillies and they act like bitches on heat (I mean the dogs).


Yeah, I didn't get any particular vibe...but I suspect even a threat of pepper spray would settle them right down.

>> ^bareboards2:

For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

What use of "men"? I can't take watching it again...

I assume it was one of them, referring to the three of them? Worrying about that is like worrying about whether the pug down the street calls himself a puppy or a dog. Utterly pointless and irrelevant.

As far as I'm concerned, the terms "girls" or "boys" are totally appropriate for my friends that are my age or younger (which doesn't rule out too many of my friends any more at 50+), or when used in informal conversations. I'd be unlikely to use it in a speech I was giving, but in day-to-day life, talking about a boys' night out, or girls' night out...well, I can't see why it matters.

BB2, I generally agree with you, but this particular issue carries distinct hints of college-age-rabid-feminist. My advice would be to pick fights that are worth fighting. Revisit this one to see if it still seems important in a decade or so...I suspect it won't.

Prime example of *eia in my book =o)

Adding video to channels (Eia) - requested by PlayhousePals.

You are off by decades....

You boys are so touchy. I just made a suggestion that you think about something in a different way and your panties are all in a bunch.

It wouldn't hurt to think a new thought. Just lie back and relax. You might enjoy it.


>> ^Stormsinger:

>> ^bareboards2:
For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

What use of "men"? I can't take watching it again...
I assume it was one of them, referring to the three of them? Worrying about that is like worrying about whether the pug down the street calls himself a puppy or a dog. Utterly pointless and irrelevant.
As far as I'm concerned, the terms "girls" or "boys" are totally appropriate for my friends that are my age or younger (which doesn't rule out too many of my friends any more at 50+), or when used in informal conversations. I'd be unlikely to use it in a speech I was giving, but in day-to-day life, talking about a boys' night out, or girls' night out...well, I can't see why it matters.
BB2, I generally agree with you, but this particular issue carries distinct hints of college-age-rabid-feminist. My advice would be to pick fights that are worth fighting. Revisit this one to see if it still seems important in a decade or so...I suspect it won't.

Sorry my response was so pissy..... I am just frustrated that after forty years of talking about this, I am still hearing the EXACT SAME RESPONSES from folks who don't take the time to actually think about the topic. It all just parroted back, the same old same old.

I sound like a broken record because I hear a broken record. For forty years.

Anyway, had you gone back and listened to the beginning of the clip where they call themselves "real men" or something like that, my comment might have made more sense. Can you imagine three young women saying "if I do this amazing act of bravery, then I'll prove myself as a real woman"? We just don't talk like that in our culture. And that makes me sad. And had done for FORTY YEARS.

If it is still going in ten years, I shall be even more sad.

>> ^bareboards2:

You are off by decades....
You boys are so touchy. I just made a suggestion that you think about something in a different way and your panties are all in a bunch.
It wouldn't hurt to think a new thought. Just lie back and relax. You might enjoy it.

>> ^Stormsinger:
>> ^bareboards2:
For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

What use of "men"? I can't take watching it again...
I assume it was one of them, referring to the three of them? Worrying about that is like worrying about whether the pug down the street calls himself a puppy or a dog. Utterly pointless and irrelevant.
As far as I'm concerned, the terms "girls" or "boys" are totally appropriate for my friends that are my age or younger (which doesn't rule out too many of my friends any more at 50+), or when used in informal conversations. I'd be unlikely to use it in a speech I was giving, but in day-to-day life, talking about a boys' night out, or girls' night out...well, I can't see why it matters.
BB2, I generally agree with you, but this particular issue carries distinct hints of college-age-rabid-feminist. My advice would be to pick fights that are worth fighting. Revisit this one to see if it still seems important in a decade or so...I suspect it won't.

>> ^bareboards2:

Sorry my response was so pissy..... I am just frustrated that after forty years of talking about this, I am still hearing the EXACT SAME RESPONSES from folks who don't take the time to actually think about the topic. It all just parroted back, the same old same old.
I sound like a broken record because I hear a broken record. For forty years.
Anyway, had you gone back and listened to the beginning of the clip where they call themselves "real men" or something like that, my comment might have made more sense. Can you imagine three young women saying "if I do this amazing act of bravery, then I'll prove myself as a real woman"? We just don't talk like that in our culture. And that makes me sad. And had done for FORTY YEARS.
If it is still going in ten years, I shall be even more sad.
>> ^bareboards2:
You are off by decades....
You boys are so touchy. I just made a suggestion that you think about something in a different way and your panties are all in a bunch.
It wouldn't hurt to think a new thought. Just lie back and relax. You might enjoy it.
>> ^Stormsinger:
>> ^bareboards2:
For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

What use of "men"? I can't take watching it again...
I assume it was one of them, referring to the three of them? Worrying about that is like worrying about whether the pug down the street calls himself a puppy or a dog. Utterly pointless and irrelevant.
As far as I'm concerned, the terms "girls" or "boys" are totally appropriate for my friends that are my age or younger (which doesn't rule out too many of my friends any more at 50+), or when used in informal conversations. I'd be unlikely to use it in a speech I was giving, but in day-to-day life, talking about a boys' night out, or girls' night out...well, I can't see why it matters.
BB2, I generally agree with you, but this particular issue carries distinct hints of college-age-rabid-feminist. My advice would be to pick fights that are worth fighting. Revisit this one to see if it still seems important in a decade or so...I suspect it won't.




I...still don't understand your complaint on this one. Are you upset they referred to themselves as men? or are you saying because they're using the term "real men" they're trying to.. I don't know, describe an aspect you feel isn't reflected upon women?

Or is the argument that 'men' still refer to women as 'girls'?

I see you making an argument about something you're definitely passionate about.. but I really just have no clue as to what that is.

I certainly enjoyed it. It's nice to see good-spirited teens like this bunch here!

>> ^bareboards2:

Sorry my response was so pissy..... I am just frustrated that after forty years of talking about this, I am still hearing the EXACT SAME RESPONSES from folks who don't take the time to actually think about the topic. It all just parroted back, the same old same old.
I sound like a broken record because I hear a broken record. For forty years.
Anyway, had you gone back and listened to the beginning of the clip where they call themselves "real men" or something like that, my comment might have made more sense. Can you imagine three young women saying "if I do this amazing act of bravery, then I'll prove myself as a real woman"? We just don't talk like that in our culture. And that makes me sad. And had done for FORTY YEARS.
If it is still going in ten years, I shall be even more sad.


I have some exciting new thoughts for you to try out, but let's start with the mundane specific case of the gentlemen in the video. It seems obvious that they're contrasting 'men' with 'boys' rather than 'men' with 'women/girls'. That's the old rite of passage being invoked, nothing to do with sex at all. Being British, they also can't help talking with a certain degree of irony that some might miss. These points are only worth making because they highlight your paranoia and oversensitivity.

Sex is ultimately irrelevant; at a 50/50 split it's too shallow a distinction to be meaningful in most cases. Gender is a personal construct, which scarcely signifies outside the individual who inhabits it. If someone, for whatever reason incomprehensible to us, chooses to incorporate their ability to tolerate capsaicin into their gender identity then it's really none of our business. We've certainly no cause to be threatened by it on a personal or cultural level.

I don't consider myself to have a gender. The rational thing to do is treat people as individuals. When you talk about the cultural implications of calling someone a girl, that means as much to me as a teenagers complaining about discrimination against vampires.

It's possible to think very seriously about a topic and decide it doesn't matter. It's just as important to point out what doesn't matter as what does. Then we can stop wasting our energy, forty years worth in your case, on trifles - and concentrate on what's actually worth thinking about. Feminists seem to only think about things that don't matter, which is why everyone hates them. Every human being on earth, and I mean that literally, agrees that the various sexes and genders don't need to be assigned different rights, or at least that we're not sophisticated enough to be able to tease out and codify the very subtle differences between those groups, individuals, and any individual at different moments in their life. That's where the issue ends. There is nothing else to talk about, but when you've squandered so much time on and identified yourself so strongly with such a simple little idea you have to invent a lot of nonsense non-issues to rant on about just to make it all seem worthwhile.

Stop being a feminist; start being a rational person who naturally agrees with the single sensible point feminists have to make and go and do something useful with your time.

I won't go as far as gorillaman, and say you're being paranoid and oversensitive...that's not really for me to decide. But I will say that from what I'm hearing you say, it seems more of a "pet peeve" than something that actually is going to make a difference to anyone else. I can relate to that...I have a number of those myself (many related to the English language, like irregardless, and alot).

But he does have a good point about the way they use the term "men" being in reference to a rite of passage, and I have indeed heard similar statements from women (well girls, technically...too immature to be called women).

I don't agree with him about feminism in general...I do think there are many gender-related issues still worthy of support. I just don't find this to be one of them, even after having given it a fair amount of thought and debate over the years. Girl, boy, kid...there are many different uses for those words, and I do use them pretty evenly. Well, kids probably gets a bit more use, because it covers multi-gendered groups of people < 40 years old. >> ^bareboards2:

Sorry my response was so pissy..... I am just frustrated that after forty years of talking about this, I am still hearing the EXACT SAME RESPONSES from folks who don't take the time to actually think about the topic. It all just parroted back, the same old same old.
I sound like a broken record because I hear a broken record. For forty years.
Anyway, had you gone back and listened to the beginning of the clip where they call themselves "real men" or something like that, my comment might have made more sense. Can you imagine three young women saying "if I do this amazing act of bravery, then I'll prove myself as a real woman"? We just don't talk like that in our culture. And that makes me sad. And had done for FORTY YEARS.
If it is still going in ten years, I shall be even more sad.
>> ^bareboards2:
You are off by decades....
You boys are so touchy. I just made a suggestion that you think about something in a different way and your panties are all in a bunch.
It wouldn't hurt to think a new thought. Just lie back and relax. You might enjoy it.
>> ^Stormsinger:
>> ^bareboards2:
For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

What use of "men"? I can't take watching it again...
I assume it was one of them, referring to the three of them? Worrying about that is like worrying about whether the pug down the street calls himself a puppy or a dog. Utterly pointless and irrelevant.
As far as I'm concerned, the terms "girls" or "boys" are totally appropriate for my friends that are my age or younger (which doesn't rule out too many of my friends any more at 50+), or when used in informal conversations. I'd be unlikely to use it in a speech I was giving, but in day-to-day life, talking about a boys' night out, or girls' night out...well, I can't see why it matters.
BB2, I generally agree with you, but this particular issue carries distinct hints of college-age-rabid-feminist. My advice would be to pick fights that are worth fighting. Revisit this one to see if it still seems important in a decade or so...I suspect it won't.

Same conversation for forty years. Sigh.

I woke up thinking about this. And before reading what awaited me here, I had an idea. An experiment.

A rational, non-paranoid experiment.

@Stormsinger @gorillaman.... Wanna do a scientific and social experiment? Just for laughs?

Spend one day and use the word "woman" to refer to anyone female over the age of 20. Doesn't have to have any big meaning to it. Just try it. If you happen to hear or read someone use the word "girl" to refer to a female over the age of 20, substitute the word "woman" in your mind.

During this day, for this rational, non-paranoid scientific and social experiment, substitute the word "boy" in your mind whenever you hear the word "man." Say the word "boy" instead of "man" when speaking.

Doing it for a week would be better. I'll settle for a day.

If you decide to try this rational, non-paranoid scientific and social experiment, I'd love to hear about your experience.

One day. Rational. Scientific. Social. Experiment.

Since the words are interchangeable, then you really shouldn't have any trouble doing this rational, scientific, social experiment.

You up for it? I think it would be intellectually interesting. Anybody else out there game for it? We could have a Sift-wide rational, scientific and social experiment!

^^ Oh, and @Shepppard. Sorry I forgot to link you. You wanna try the experiment? It is the answer to your question of what I am going on about.

I am really excited by this idea. After 40 years, the conversation may actually change!

Wish I had thought of this sooner....

@bareboards2

It seems to me that since you're currently talking to several people with wildly different viewpoints and having the 'same conversation' with each of them, and given you decided what your latest contribution was going to be before you read the replies to the previous one, the reason you've been stuck in this forty year rut may be that your idea of conversation differs somewhat from the accepted multidirectional standard.

Which renders your repeated exhortations to "open your mind" and "think a new thought" spectacularly ironic.

Presumably it's occurred to you that your experiment can be run in reverse? Force yourself to hear 'girl' and 'woman' and 'boy' and 'man' as equally valid and harmless ways of addressing people, and observe to what extent it undermines your ability to perceive others as equal and treat them fairly.

>> ^bareboards2:

Same conversation for forty years. Sigh.
I woke up thinking about this. And before reading what awaited me here, I had an idea. An experiment.
A rational, non-paranoid experiment.
@Stormsinger @gorillaman.... Wanna do a scientific and social experiment? Just for laughs?
Spend one day and use the word "woman" to refer to anyone female over the age of 20. Doesn't have to have any big meaning to it. Just try it. If you happen to hear or read someone use the word "girl" to refer to a female over the age of 20, substitute the word "woman" in your mind.
During this day, for this rational, non-paranoid scientific and social experiment, substitute the word "boy" in your mind whenever you hear the word "man." Say the word "boy" instead of "man" when speaking.
Doing it for a week would be better. I'll settle for a day.
If you decide to try this rational, non-paranoid scientific and social experiment, I'd love to hear about your experience.
One day. Rational. Scientific. Social. Experiment.
Since the words are interchangeable, then you really shouldn't have any trouble doing this rational, scientific, social experiment.
You up for it? I think it would be intellectually interesting. Anybody else out there game for it? We could have a Sift-wide rational, scientific and social experiment!

I do find it a bit odd that you call these different views "the same conversation". I see each of us talking about somewhat different issues.


I'll give it a try...and what's more, I'll make a prediction, based on my own knowledge of my life.

If I hear any of those four words (man, woman, boy, girl) about someone over the age of 20, it'll be an unusual day. They're not words that come up in my normal conversations, and I don't watch TV. If I'm talking to or about someone, I tend to use names. If I'm talking about groups of people, they're rarely segregated by gender, so I would usually use "folks" or "people".

P.S. this quoting thing is starting to get annoying again. It can take anywhere from 1-3 carriage returns to get a blank line between paragraphs now. Did something change recently?

@Stormsinger... then maybe you should do it for a week, if those four words don't show up in daily life? Two days? Three days? Especially if you don't watch TV.

If the sample size is too small, then the scientific and social experiment won't have enough data.

It'll show up in videos though. Titles on videos. Comments on videos. That might be a good source. After all, it popped on this video, which prompted this whole conversation!

FYI -- Your "different views" aren't different to me, which is why I say it is the same conversation. I have heard all this before, at various times over the past 40 years. It may be new to you. It isn't to me.

Really happy that you are up for it. This is something new for me, asking folks to try this. I'm really excited to learn about your experience. However it plays out.

Yippee!

>> ^bareboards2:

@Stormsinger... then maybe you should do it for a week, if those four words don't show up in daily life? Two days? Three days? Especially if you don't watch TV.
If the sample size is too small, then the scientific and social experiment won't have enough data.
It'll show up in videos though. Titles on videos. Comments on videos. That might be a good source. After all, it popped on this video, which prompted this whole conversation!
FYI -- Your "different views" aren't different to me, which is why I say it is the same conversation. I have heard all this before, at various times over the past 40 years. It may be new to you. It isn't to me.
Really happy that you are up for it. This is something new for me, asking folks to try this. I'm really excited to learn about your experience. However it plays out.
Yippee!

You're missing the point. It doesn't matter how many conversations you've had...what's going on -here- is three separate conversations, not one. Just because they blur together for you, doesn't actually unify them.

Nor is the conversation new to me...although the last time I had it, was in college with my then rabidly feminist girlfriend. The girls I grew up with, and the women they became, made it impossible to think that they were in any way less than men. So even then it was mostly just tweaking her...she was cute when she got all wound up. She still is, but she's mellowed quite a bit and reserves her energy for fights that will make an actual difference.

@gorillaman, my having the "same conversation" for forty years is because I have heard it all. I would LOVE for someone to present a new argument so I could think about it. However, that hasn't happened in this thread. For me, it's all same old, same old.

What bothers me? The fact that it has taken me forty years to come up with my experiment. I am deeply embarrassed that in 40 years I have never changed tactics. I just kept repeating myself, thinking that since I was talking to a different person, a different group, the result of the conversation would be different.

Unfortunately, this is my personality -- guileless, obstinate, passionate, deeply sure of my own point of view (because I have constantly tested it against new information, constantly changed my opinion based on new information). But I never had the personal skills to think -- hey, try a new tactic.

There is a reason I am not in politics or sales. I lack some real people skills.

I have told people for 40 years that I was changed when I did this experiment on myself. Well, actually, my personal experiment was more radical. Every time I heard the word "girl", I imagined the subject was a black man, changed the word to "boy" and checked in with how comfortable or uncomfortable I was. That little experiment knocked my socks off as it revealed the power of words to subjugate a group of people. [In the 1970s, you DID NOT call a black man a "boy." The stereotype of a white Southern sheriff with a see-gar in his mouth, calling a grown black man a "boy" was very powerful and real back then. Not so much anymore. Thank goodness.]

But in 40 years, I have never asked anyone to do this experiment, with a time frame so it isn't too onerous. Never framed it as a scientific and social experiment. Never changed my tactics.

I am deeply embarrassed by that. I am also deeply thrilled that I finally figured this out.

If you are willing to do it, of course. It does require effort on your part.

You game? You wanna play? I honestly would love to hear how it goes for you. If that Southern sheriff stereotype resonates with you, feel free to try that version. If you want.

@Stormsinger, cool! I love that you have strong women in your life! And yeah, I am aware that women have grown up in a very different world than I did. (There were no women pilots, few women doctors, things that current generations take for granted. That is so great, I can't hardly stand it. These things have shaped their psyches, which is way great.)

And. You gonna try the experiment? Only call men "boys", regardless of their age? Only call women "women", translating the "girl" to "woman", if they are age 20 or older? Not just TV and videos, but newspaper articles? Anywhere, any time?

As an experiment? Be open to how the experience is for you, as the language changes?

Wow... Such a stupid debate on what girls/boys/men/women mean. Since Girls/Women are the same sex and Boys/Men are the same sex, wtf does it matter if one was used and not the other? What about Guys/Gals? Ladies/Germs? Dicks/C*nts? Rational-doesn't-use-his-emotions-to-control-his-thoughts-asshole/Crazy-PMS-Over-reacting-Bitch?

They would hate eating my food. I add those peppers for flavor, not spice.

>> ^SevenFingers:

Wow... Such a stupid debate on what girls/boys/men/women mean. Since Girls/Women are the same sex and Boys/Men are the same sex, wtf does it matter if one was used and not the other? What about Guys/Gals? Ladies/Germs? Dicks/C nts? Rational-doesn't-use-his-emotions-to-control-his-thoughts-asshole/Crazy-PMS-Over-reacting-Bitch?


Taking it a bit fucking far, aren't you dude?

I was reading Dan Savage's column yesterday (love that man, every bit of his potty mouthed being). The first sentence in one letter asking for advice was this:

"I'm a man who just got out of a two-year relationship with a great girl."

So if we do the experiment, the sentence now becomes:

"I'm a boy who just got out of a two-year relationship with a great woman."

@gorillaman @Stormsinger @SevenFingers, do you honestly experience those two sentences exactly the same way? Are they conveying the same information?

Or are you startled by the experimental sentence? Is a different story being told about the relationship of these two people? Who has maturity? Who has, excuse me for using a charged word, more power? And with that power, do they have more responsibility?

Storm, you said you would be willing to do this experiment ... have you noticed any word situations like this yet? Gorilla, you never answered my question, so I am taking it that you are declining the experiment?

Since I am post-menopausal, if that Crazy PMS comment was directed at me, it misses the mark. No PMS. Menopause is behind me.

I'm practically a man now, hormonally.

>> ^SevenFingers:

Wow... Such a stupid debate on what girls/boys/men/women mean. Since Girls/Women are the same sex and Boys/Men are the same sex, wtf does it matter if one was used and not the other? What about Guys/Gals? Ladies/Germs? Dicks/C nts? Rational-doesn't-use-his-emotions-to-control-his-thoughts-asshole/Crazy-PMS-Over-reacting-Bitch?

I've wondered before if this sort of thing isn't a generational divide. Did your cohort become so used to arguing with your parents, who were actually sexist and racist and homophobic, while feeling you had to pay such careful attention to your own attitudes and vocabulary to avoid becoming like them; that you're not equipped to understand your children, for whom all that nonsense is so far behind and beneath them they don't bother to trammel themselves in the same way, when they try to explain why calling something 'gay' isn't a symptom of an underlying prejudice?
Nobody cares about that any more. None of the smart people anyway, who are themselves the most viciously oppressed and under-represented group in modern society.

I'm eagerly looking forward to the decline of gendered nouns and pronouns in general. It's such a bizarrely inappropriate way of communicating, the equivalent of appending "(...and by the way I'm talking about a male here)" to so many words that don't call for that detail.

Your two example sentences honestly, HONESTLY read exactly the same to me. This ought to be welcome news to you. It means the war is over, you can climb out of the trenches into the sunny world of a post-feminist future.

I'm running your experiment in a casual way, though as has been mentioned already those words come up too infrequently and in the wrong contexts to get much out of it so far. I'm afraid you'll be disappointed or assume bad faith if we report an underwhelming experience, but if we find these words as harmless as we say we do then that's all we can report.
Your 'radical' version is unsound because it involves projecting a specific attitude directly in to the experiment. Of course you'll find chauvinism - you put it there.

What do you think is the #1 reason 'girl' as a synonym for 'woman' is in more common usage than 'boy' for 'man'?

>> ^bareboards2:

I was reading Dan Savage's column yesterday (love that man, every bit of his potty mouthed being). The first sentence in one letter asking for advice was this:
"I'm a man who just got out of a two-year relationship with a great girl."
So if we do the experiment, the sentence now becomes:
"I'm a boy who just got out of a two-year relationship with a great woman."
gorillaman Stormsinger SevenFingers, do you honestly experience those two sentences exactly the same way? Are they conveying the same information?
Or are you startled by the experimental sentence? Is a different story being told about the relationship of these two people? Who has maturity? Who has, excuse me for using a charged word, more power? And with that power, do they have more responsibility?
Storm, you said you would be willing to do this experiment ... have you noticed any word situations like this yet? Gorilla, you never answered my question, so I am taking it that you are declining the experiment?

>> ^bareboards2:

Storm, you said you would be willing to do this experiment ... have you noticed any word situations like this yet? Gorilla, you never answered my question, so I am taking it that you are declining the experiment?

Have yet to run into any use of any of those words, other than your post... It's rather what I figured would happen. We'll see if it happens over the next day or two.

FWIW, I'm definitely primed to notice any of the four now though, which is a rather odd feeling in and of itself.

I believe you, @gorillaman. If those sentences read the same to you, then they read the same to you. It IS hard for me to understand how that can be true because my experience is radically different, but that is my problem, not yours.

I'm sure it is a generational thing (although I know that there are young men and women who are careful with their language, so it isn't JUST me and my generation. You made some pretty sweeping statements about the whole world, as if the way you experience things is the standard. Gotta disagree with you there. And your use of "we" does seem a tad bit ... over-reaching.) It blows my mind how things have changed in the past 40 years. I grew up with arguments about whether it was okay to call an author who happened to be a woman an "authoress." Can you imagine? Making the act of writing a book gender-related? That word is gone. As is "poetess." And very few women were reporters -- if they wanted to work for a newspaper, they were mostly relegated to the "women's section" where the news was all about society events and recipes. It was even labelled "women's section." It was a different world, and I do NOT miss it.

I too would love it if gendered nouns and pronouns went away. I just learned that until relatively recently, it was proper usage to say "their" instead of "his" as the gender neutral version. And it was a woman who worked hard to change it (I guess it bugged her that a singular subject would have a multiple pronoun, or whatever the grammar terms are.) I'd love to go back to "them" and "their".

I disagree with you that my "radical" version is unsound. I acknowledged that the cultural significance has changed in the past 40 years. However, I dare say you would not go up to a 35 year old black man who is a stranger to you and call him a boy to his face. Although if you do it, I would love to hear the results. We would need a sample of more than one, right? -- you might get a polite person, after all!

If you try this experiment, I urge you to avoid a Southern accent and turn the "boy" into a two syllable word.

As to your question -- "What do you think is the #1 reason 'girl' as a synonym for 'woman' is in more common usage than 'boy' for 'man'?" -- you wouldn't accept my answer, I fear. It hasn't changed in 40 years. I hear things you don't, right? I am happy to tell you, if you really want to hear. I am afraid what I say will just cause you to scoff.

I would love to hear your answer to that, though. Why is that? Why is it okay to casually, consistently, overwhelmingly call a grown woman a girl, but we don't do that to men? Why the difference? What is gained from that word substitution? What is lost?

And why is sometimes okay to use "girl" and "boy" for grown men and women? I do it all the time. Boys' night out, girls' night out -- those are just fine with me.

Personally, I would love to see the word "guy" get ungendered. I have a very butch Lesbian friend who HATES it when a group of women is called "guys." I can't stand the word "gal" -- don't know why. It is just... ancient and stodgy. I love being out with the guys, but lord save me from being out with the "gals".

I do wonder about this part of your attempt at this experiment -- "words come up ... in the wrong contexts." I don't understand what that means. It is a simple list of rules. You hear the word "man", change it to "boy." You hear the word "girl" applied to anyone age 20 and older, you change it to "woman." If you are adventurous, you use those words when talking. How can there be "wrong contexts"? That is exactly the experiment, isn't it?

Any way this plays out, I really appreciate you engaging me on this. This is the most fun I've had with this topic EVER. And I really appreciate hearing from a different generational perspective. I'm letting it percolate and I can feel things shifting a bit.

Oh gawd. What a fricking long post. Sorry.

>> ^bareboards2:

Oh gawd. What a fricking long post. Sorry.


We need comment tags like wall-of-text, maybe? Used to have those a lot on GEnie.

@bareboards2

Don't be sorry - I love long posts, but I'll reply with a relatively short one.

It's amazing that you mention the 'authoress/poetess' controversy because I had exactly that in mind earlier. Good riddance.

This may not have been the case forty years ago, but today I'm all but certain the reason 'girl' is a popular alternative to 'woman' is what is lost in the substitution - one syllable. It just rolls off the tongue more easily, whereas there's no similar incentive to switch 'boy' for 'man'. Sometimes it's that simple. I suspect your answer would differ, which is why I ask.
For myself, I call women women, but that's just the way my vocabulary has evolved; I'm not making a social statement by doing so and if there were a single-syllable alternative that appealed to me I would jump on it for the same reason as if we finally fixed the number seven and the letter W.

When I say these words have come up in the wrong contexts, I only mean when they're being used to refer particularly to age, "grown man", and there's no way to reconcile the substitution with the meaning of the sentence. Actually if this exercise has taught me nothing else over the last couple of days, it has exposed how infrequently we seem to use these words outside of pop music - and I'm not sure getting Katy Perry to sing 'California Women' would necessarily redeem the song as a feminist anthem.

@gorillaman, yeah, woman is longer than the word girl.

It is also a conjunction -- wife of man. From the on-line dictionary: late O.E. wimman (pl. wimmen), lit. "woman-man," alteration of wifman (pl. wifmen), a compound of wif "woman" (see wife) + man "human being" (in Old English used in reference to both sexes; see man (n.)). Cf. Du. vrouwmens "wife," lit. "woman-man."

It does kind of get in the way, doesn't it? That extra syllable and that clunky hidden contraction.

I still think it is mostly about power, though, and your example of "grown man" kind of proves it to me. Why couldn't you say "grown boy"? If boy is the same as man, just as girl is the same as woman? A grown boy is indeed a man, yes? It actually is more accurate than "grown man."

Maybe the experiment should be simplified.... instead of doing the woman for girl substitution, simplify it to changing every "man" to "boy." Since the words are interchangeable, right? No particular meaning? Both are one syllable so no big whoop if you change them out. If girl and woman are interchangeable, meaning-wise, doesn't logic dictate that boy and man are interchangeable?

So can we change the experiment? Forget girl and woman, just change the word "man" to "boy." I know the word "man" shows up all the time. So there should be plenty of data.

"I'm a Woman. W. O. M. A. N." There's a song lyric for you. I suggest to you that the meaning would be very different if it were "I'm a Girl. G. I. R. L." Certainly the melodies are wildly different for those two songs!

I love that you call women women, by the way. Even though it takes the extra effort. Some of the women you talk to appreciate it, I'm sure.

Just for a laugh, I did this search: http://videosift.com/search?q=girl&t=v&u=&s[]=s&o=&vmin=&vmax=&sh=&l=&n=&b=&submit=Search

Scanned for how "girl" shows up on videos. On the first page, there were a deeply satisfying number of vids that were truly about girls under age 20. I was pleasantly surprised! There were also quite a few of almost naked women labeled as "girls". Which also proves my point about it being about power -- a naked girl is very different from a naked woman, yes?

Well, had the first appearance of the words "man" and "boy" today, but it was in the same conversation (comedic performance actually), and they were completely replaceable. Will keep watching for more.

I'd have probably run across our targets more under normal circumstances, but between the election, dental work, and my own job, this week has been a bit crowded...not much time for browsing the web.

Even the most profligate girl-labeller would use 'grown woman' to refer to the other kind of guy in that scenario.

This is actually the key to our disagreement.

Are you unwilling to allow that the same words can suggest completely different meanings in different contexts?
I'm not talking about 'bear' and 'bear'. I'm not even talking about 'boy - a five year old male' and 'boy - a forty year old black guy'. I'm talking about 'boy - a forty year old black guy' and 'boy - a forty year old black guy'.

We're both aware 'boy' and 'girl' can be used in denigrating ways, so can, say, 'liberal', 'geek' and 'yankee'; and all of these have neutral and positive applications.

In fact no word has a meaning independent of the context in which it's used, this is literally true - words depend entirely on interaction with each other and on the circumstances of their transmission to impart information; rhetoricians call this 'interinanimation', dictionary writers call this 'damned annoying'. It's also true that no communication is possible where words have meaning only to their speaker. Consequently, language is an ongoing negotiation.

So, my position isn't that these words are literally interchangeable, in every context, but that they are interchangeable in a lot more contexts than you will admit. You have to look to the attitude of the speaker; to do that you have to examine what they're saying contextually. Monitoring individual word usage is a cheap, futile shortcut to understanding where a person is coming from.

>> ^bareboards2:
I still think it is mostly about power, though, and your example of "grown man" kind of proves it to me. Why couldn't you say "grown boy"? If boy is the same as man, just as girl is the same as woman? A grown boy is indeed a man, yes? It actually is more accurate than "grown man."

@gorillaman -- all good points.

Except... except... except.... we do live in a sexist society. Are we the MOST sexist society? Absolutely not.

But in the CONTEXT of a sexist society, IF the words man and boy are NOT interchangeable, then we need an understanding why it is okay for women and girl to be completely interchangeable.

The number of syllables doesn't cut it for me. Not given the CONTEXT of the sexist nature of our society.

Which gets us back to the use of "boy" for a black man.

You are too young to know this, but it was absolutely the norm to call a black man "boy". It wasn't until the men said no more, do not denigrate me like that, got mad about it, invoked Black Power and Black is Beautiful that it became not okay to call a black man a boy.

Some women got mad back in the 70s and 80s, and it changed some. It is waaaay better than it used to be.

We agree. Context is everything. You seem to have missed my acknowledgement that I personally use the word boy and girl for adults in some circumstances. However, as much as you are asking me to see your context, which I have acknowledged in general, I don't see much movement on your part to allow that maybe, just maybe, I have a valid point of view. Black and white thinking isn't the path to new understanding on anyone's part.

There is no absolute right and wrong. I am not wrong. Neither are you absolutely right, although yes, there is a generational thing. There was no grrrl power in the 70s and 80s. That word has been reclaimed to a certain extent.

You mentioned popular music and how prevalent the word "girl" is. So are the words bitches, hos, and a whole slew of words you would never use to describe your girlfriend or your mother.

I guess we have come to an end to this experiment. Although I do encourage you to keep this experiment on the back burner of your mind. And continue to ask yourself -- why is okay to call an adult woman a girl with great regularity but we don't do that to adult men.

I guarantee you it isn't the presence of an extra syllable. Sometimes that is true. But for the pervasiveness of it, that just rationally, scientifically and socially doesn't cover the situation.

Thanks for playing! It has been way fun!

@bareboards2

Well if we've come to the end then that's it. I want to make just one more point, as a black and white thinker who does believe in absolute right and wrong.

We don't live in a sexist society; we live in a society where there are some sexists. No difference? It's the same as saying we live in a criminal society because there are some criminals, or a christian society because there are some christians. It's a dangerously inaccurate generalisation, as well as extravagantly unfair to the non-sexists, non-criminals, non-christians.

Feminists are anchored to the idea of an eternal, pervasive sexism that they want to keep fighting forever instead of letting our culture move beyond entirely.

@gorillaman, oh! We can keep going if you want to. I just thought we had hit a wall. If you don't think so, then by all means, let's continue.

I carefully avoided using the word sexist, until you used it first. It is such a charged word, fraught with emotions on both "sides." It is shorthand for a very complex subject. And sure enough, you have taken exception to its use, understandably.

I wish you could just take a second and consider that maybe my experiences as a woman in this world are very different than yours are. Would you argue with a black person about their experiences with racism in this country? Are we a racist country? There are some racists. Not all our citizens are racists. Does that mean that a black person can't say "man, I live in a racist society"?

I wouldn't dream of arguing with a black person on that topic. I would listen and listen carefully, because they have experiences I will never, ever have. And the only way I can learn is by listening and letting in new information.

So would you? Would you argue with a black person about their perceptions of racism in America? Are they "anchored to the idea of an eternal, pervasive sexism racism that they want to keep fighting forever"?

I'll stop typing now and await your answer to that last question. Would you argue with a black person about their experience of racism in America?

>> ^bareboards2:

@gorillaman, oh! We can keep going if you want to. I just thought we had hit a wall. If you don't think so, then by all means, let's continue.
I carefully avoided using the word sexist, until you used it first. It is such a charged word, fraught with emotions on both "sides." It is shorthand for a very complex subject. And sure enough, you have taken exception to its use, understandably.
I wish you could just take a second and consider that maybe my experiences as a woman in this world are very different than yours are. Would you argue with a black person about their experiences with racism in this country? Are we a racist country? There are some racists. Not all our citizens are racists. Does that mean that a black person can't say "man, I live in a racist society"?
I wouldn't dream of arguing with a black person on that topic. I would listen and listen carefully, because they have experiences I will never, ever have. And the only way I can learn is by listening and letting in new information.
So would you? Would you argue with a black person about their perceptions of racism in America? Are they "anchored to the idea of an eternal, pervasive sexism racism that they want to keep fighting forever"?
I'll stop typing now and await your answer to that last question. Would you argue with a black person about their experience of racism in America?


Hi, I talked with some other black persons and we all agreed that it would just be really great if you didn't use black persons as a way to try and prove whatever point it is you're trying to make.

@speechless, why would that be? What is the objection?

>> ^bareboards2:
I'll stop typing now and await your answer to that last question. Would you argue with a black person about their experience of racism in America?


Yes I would and I have, because @speechless, race is another thing we should just stop banging on about. It's an even less useful signifier than gender.

You should probably discard all your experiences as a woman. I've had a couple of experiences as a woman and a few more as a man; and let me tell you, compelling as they were, they don't influence my politics. We should endeavour to distance ourselves from anecdotalism and consider every issue intellectually and impartially - that's the best way to learn.

If we are going to continue then we have to revisit context, where we obviously haven't been able to understand one another. I don't want you to 'see my context'. The point I want to get across to you is that while any word, like 'boy', will have many connotations - age, sex, gender, race, power, innocence and many more, and subtly shaded combinations of any number of these; the application of that word in one context, by the stereotyped southern sheriff say, doesn't retroactively change the meaning of the word used in another context, "Dear Dan Savage, I'm a boy..." You have to think of these as distinct 'meta-words' rather than a single word that you imagine is being used wrong.

However much you might object to a perceived cultural infantilization of women, which I contend isn't a meaningful grouping anyway, playing the word-police is a truly bizarre and useless way of opposing it.

words are the grouping of sounds and symbols in which we express:
thoughts,
dreams,
visions,
feelings,
ideas,
and in that light words will always be inadequate.
we live in a subjective reality and impose our own understanding upon the words we hear/read.

@gorillaman is correct.context is everything because that is the tool we use to discern the INTENT of the speaker/writer.words by themselves are just weak and facile constructs with little power or influence.it is the surrounding words that prop up and help make those words come alive.painting pictures in our heads or producing an emotive response.
which can be a positive or negative depending on the nature of the listener/reader.

Alright alright, we're sorry. They're fags.
>> ^bareboards2:

For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

Seriously though, I just stumbled on this which reminds me of your post
http://oglaf.com/amazonlinguistics/1/
and I thought it was hilarious.
>> ^bareboards2:

For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.

Oh dear lord, I am BOOKMARKING THAT PAGE.

Yep. That about sums it up.

Thanks!!!!

>> ^gwiz665:

Seriously though, I just stumbled on this which reminds me of your post
http://oglaf.com/amazonlinguistics/1/
and I thought it was hilarious.
>> ^bareboards2:
For folks out there who call women "girls", please note the use of the word "men" in the beginning of this vid, and store it away for the future.