The word "Man"

[Question Mark]

This is a continuation of a discussion that began in the Election for Minister of Science thread in the CivIV Demogame forum.
Short summary:
*Koonrad used the word "Man" as a synonyme for "humanity".
*I wrote that doing so was sexist.
*Everyone disagreed with me.
*Some people did however agree that parts of the English language might be sexist.
*There was also some general debate about political correctness.

 

[farting bob]

Saying it sexist is kinda stupid IMO. It has different meanings depending on the situation its used in. In this regard, man is a perfectly good description of humanity.

 

[Question Mark]

For the record, and as most people were able to comprehend, I meant humanity by the use of 'Man'.

I did understand that, and I did not intend to accuse you personally of being a sexist (although I see how it could easily be interpreted that way). What I meant (without being nearly clear enough) is that the English language is in many ways sexist, but that using it in such a way in many cases can be avoided.

I just follow the conventions of writing and really don't care.

Caring about equality is important, if you want to change the world to the better. I do, and I hope you do to. Simply following conventions will often help maintaining unfair and immoral systems, even if this is not the intention at all.

Oh, and

 

[Question Mark]

In this regard, man is a perfectly good description of humanity.

"Man" and "Mankind" can be used to mean "humanity". "Woman" and "Womankind" cannot. Isn't that sexism?

 

[storealex]

It's sexism in the language, but not by the people saying the sentence.

In Denmark, black people are called "Neger". That is quite a racist name, from times of slavery when racism was politically correct. Never the less, "Neger" is the name of black people in Denmark, so you are not a racist, or mean anything racist, by using the word.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Actually, the word "Neger" is in origin perfectly neutral and descriptive - it comes from the Latin niger "black". It got negative connotations by constant association with black people, which weren't highly regarded at the times.

The use of "Man" to mean the human race goes directly back to the original meaning of the word, viz. "human being, person". I don't think there's anything racist about it.

Tangentially, the Swedish word for "human" is feminine gender, rather than common gender as one might expect. For some reason the feminists never complain about that one.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

I personally try not to use 'Man' when referring to humanity. Its outdated and sexist. Its a relic from a time when the only creatures on planet Earth that counted were white males. Everyone and everything else was just playing a supporting role.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I personally try not to use 'Man' when referring to humanity. Its outdated and sexist. Its a relic from a time when the only creatures on planet Earth that counted were white males.

I'm afraid the usage predates that period.

 

[Methos]

I believe its more due to being the normal way 'man' is used in the English language. Many of my history professors at college (years ago) always referred to mankind as man. No one every argued it was sexist and I honestly don't recall anyone bringing it up in any outside conversation.

I also don't see how this is considered predominately an English language problem. I studied Spanish in high school and most words were based sexually. What I mean is a el (male) or la (female) was put before words. I never understood why it was done, but can that not be considered sexist?

The Spanish word for black is negro which is a racist remark here in the US. Yet it isn't considered racist, even when spoken by a Hispanic speaking individual here in the US. Why?

For those of you whose primary language isn't English think about your own language and what words could be considered sexist by non-native speakers? It's tough. Just like me when you look at your own language and the way you speak it you don't always see the possibly of a sexist statement as the majority of its citizens don't use it that way.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

I'm afraid the usage predates that period.

Whichever group it was that first started calling humanity 'Man', werent white males in charge of that society?

 

[The Last Conformist]

Whichever group it was that first started calling humanity 'Man', werent white males in charge of that society?

Yes there were, but they didn't have a concept of white males as the top dogs in the hierarchy of mankind. They identified by ethnicity, not race, and were at best dimly aware than non-Caucasoid people existed. Oh, and of course, "man" did not mean "male" to them. As already said, the word meant "human being" at the time.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Last ok, it was latter day white males who used it in a sexist way then. Well, they werent consciously being sexist, to them, the dominance of men over women was just the natural obvious order of things.

 

[Methos]

Thinking on it, I believe the LC is correct in that originally 'man' was humanking and later was adjusted to equate to the male person.

Plus I don't believe whites were the dominant ethnicity until the last thousand years or so. This is my opinion only.

 

[Evil Tyrant]

@Question Mark:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using the word man to describe the human race. The only people really offended by it are the same hypersensitive whack jobs who gave us the words "African-American" and "womyn". It is in my opinion possible to create and maintain a society that gives blacks, women, and other groups the freedom to pursue their dreams without having to mangle the English language beyond recognition.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Yeah its dumb to get worked up over it. Its just an inaccurate anachronism.

 

[koondrad]

Caring about equality is important, if you want to change the world to the better. I do, and I hope you do to.

I care about equality; it's just that this convention is so old that it is an accepted part of the language. Almost all of the women I know would probably not consider it an oppressive/offensive/sexist use of the word.

 

[jonatas]

I care about equality; it's just that this convention is so old that it is an accepted part of the language. Almost all of the women I know would probably not consider it an oppressive/offensive/sexist use of the word.

The convention is so old that it is archaic in Modern English. If someone consistently refers to humanity as "mankind" or uses "man" to refer to everyone, then their usage of the language is outdated and curious, IMO.

 

[koondrad]

The convention is so old that it is archaic in Modern English. If someone consistently refers to humanity as "mankind" or uses "man" to refer to everyone, then their usage of the language is outdated and curious, IMO.

It is funny that you should say that. It was used in my election spiel to help speed it up and to make it more formal. Do you feel that we should just give up on words because they are outdated? Do you think we should let an aspect of our culture die?

 

[Kyriakos]

In greek there is no problem since the words for man and for human (and humanity) are completely different.
Man= Andras
Human= Anthropos

According to Plato the word Anthopos comes from Άνω (upwards) and Πρόσκω (observing). This is debatable though.

 

[The Last Conformist]

If we're to enter comparative linguistics, I might add that the abovementioned Swedish word for "human" is människa or mänska, which historically is the word "man" with a feminine ending. Go figure.