AVENUE VIET Forum Index AVENUE VIET
An Online Community
 
AlbumAlbum   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of the webmasters, administrators and moderators of this forum. Refer to the complete disclaimer.
Gender-specific titles
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AVENUE VIET Forum Index » The War Room
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Wildflower



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 6881
Location: Shuttling between France and the US

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 1:00 am    Post subject: Angelina Jolie is an "actor"? Reply with quote

I hate it when they call women "heroes" or "actors" when "heroines" and "actresses" are words that exist and are in common usage. Marion Cotillard didn't get the Oscar for the "best (female) actor", she got it for the "best actress in a leading role". very upset

I skimmed through the post and that line caught my eye. Haven't really read the op ed piece yet but if Seed approves of it, it must be quite something! wink

Will come back to read later and give my opinion.

P.S. Which paper or magazine is this from, Seed?
_________________
My Most Prestigious Award wink
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
X



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 856
Location: Lala Land

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 2:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm no English linguist, but I think your hatred is misplaced. Acting began with only men so "actor" is the original. Actress sounds like a derivative term. In a world that does not skip any opportunity to put down women I think you should be thankful for every chance women are placed equal to men. Actor may sound unfeminine but it's small price comparing to the gain in women's equality. Therefore, I support "actor" be used for acting women.
_________________
Oh man!
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageMSN Messenger
X



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 856
Location: Lala Land

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 1:38 pm    Post subject: Re: You don't get it! Reply with quote

Wildflower wrote:

By calling a woman an "actor", you're implicitly saying that you consider the masculine form to be superior to the feminine.


That's only true if you are a sexist to begin with. These days still lots of women find it offending to be remotely associated with masculine, and the same goes for men with feminine.

Re equality, the more equal people are, the less different labels exist. It is no wonder that today we can no longer tell from a job application that the person is of a certain color, age, marital status, sexual preferences. Do you think we could achieve that if every group fights to have their own labels?

Why would you want to have a different form for feminine or masculine? When it gets distinct enough comparison is inevitable, and where there's comparison there bounds to be inequality. Can you blame an employer who pays women cheaper because her work is "feminine" which is factly inferior to men's work in the physical department, say in labor work???
_________________
Oh man!
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageMSN Messenger
Wildflower



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 6881
Location: Shuttling between France and the US

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 5:14 pm    Post subject: You just don't understand Reply with quote

The power of words, and you're arguing about something else altogether.

You also haven't answered my question. Should it be King Elizabeth, Prince Victoria and Venus, God of Love so everything is equal? confused

As long as you don't understand the power that words have, and the preconception that "the masculine covers the feminine" under the guise of the masculine name being "neutral" (neutral, my foot) and how that devalorizes women, there's no point in pursuing this discussion. "Labels" have nothing to do with it. Sexism is different from racism and other forms of discrimination.

I guess you, and quite a number of the younger people (guys and gals) in this forum, don't remember - don't even know - how it was back in, as recently as the early 70's. But I don't want to get into a history of the modern feminist movement. Youngsters these days take so much for granted that we fought for. Including the idea of a woman running for President - which is why that word is, indeed "neutral" or if you prefer "unisex" (which "actor" and "actress" are not), at least in English. When the Constitution was written, women didn't even have the vote - they were barely thought to have a soul, let alone a mind - it never occurred to the Founding Fathers (no Mothers, you'll notice, as if these guys were all born out of thin air) that one day women would get out of the home, nursery and kitchen to run for public office. "A woman's place [was] in the house" (Now it's the House - and the Senate - maybe even the White House) Cool
_________________
My Most Prestigious Award wink
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
TT



Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 935
Location: California

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 5:34 pm    Post subject: Hem, Hem... Reply with quote

I know another chat forum where you two would be deemed to be seriously off-topic.

All this debate is very interesting but very far from the initial post about Angelina Jolie's op ed piece. Wink

Why don't we get back to "Bring them home"?
_________________
When the cook's not happy, ain't nobody happy! bleh
Back to top
View user's profileSend private message
X



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 856
Location: Lala Land

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 7:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

di`,
Look at your post now. It's neither reasoning nor even level-headed. You basically talked from emotions.
_________________
Oh man!
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageMSN Messenger
Wildflower



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 6881
Location: Shuttling between France and the US

PostPosted: Fri Feb 29, 2008 9:44 pm    Post subject: Lẽ dĩ nhiên Reply with quote

X wrote:
di`,
Look at your post now. It's neither reasoning nor even level-headed. You basically talked from emotions.

Of course I do. I feel strongly about this because it affects my sex more than yours. But I also have my reasons, as a feminist and as a linguist, but I can't put them through to you - you just refuse to see. You talk from the point of view of a man, a non-specialist in languages as you admit yourself, and in ignorance of what's behind the whole fight about feminization of names.

You don't answer simple questions, and you pull in racism and segregation, which have nothing to do with my protest at the use of the word "actor" to describe an actress. It's called "đánh tróng lảng", it diverts from the basic debate.

Now can we agree to disagree and put it to rest?

Seed's post is interesting and deserves to be discussed on its substance. I put in a sort of footnote because the last line caught my eye. We've said all we had to say, now let's drop it, OK?

I'm not posting on this matter any more. wave hello goodbye
_________________
My Most Prestigious Award wink
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
Mat Hi Cuoi



Joined: 02 Mar 2005
Posts: 155

PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:59 pm    Post subject: Let's keep it simple...and neutral! Reply with quote

X wrote:
I'm no English linguist, but I think your hatred is misplaced. Acting began with only men so "actor" is the original. Actress sounds like a derivative term. In a world that does not skip any opportunity to put down women I think you should be thankful for every chance women are placed equal to men. Actor may sound unfeminine but it's small price comparing to the gain in women's equality. Therefore, I support "actor" be used for acting women.


Hahhahahahaha! Cool! I wouldn't want the use of "Doctress" in lieu of Doctor either! A doctor is a doctor. I hate when someone tries to qualify by saying female doctor or female president or female anything. That's like implying there is a difference in quality of their work. Ugh!

Besides, the word "actor" ends in "or", like in:

preditor,
animator,
visitor,

which are neither masculine nor feminine (and I'm talking about the English language. Nevermind that some of these words may have come from the masculine version of some other Latin-based language). We never should have created the word actress because there was no need for it. It was neutral to begin with. It's not the like "fireman", where the "man" needed to be dropped like a hot potato. I agree that that was politically incorrect. Now, fire "fighter" is neutral.


Last edited by Mat Hi Cuoi on Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:42 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailYahoo Messenger
X



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 856
Location: Lala Land

PostPosted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:52 pm    Post subject: Re: Let's keep it simple...and neutral! Reply with quote

Mat Hi Cuoi wrote:
X wrote:
I'm no English linguist, but I think your hatred is misplaced. Acting began with only men so "actor" is the original. Actress sounds like a derivative term. In a world that does not skip any opportunity to put down women I think you should be thankful for every chance women are placed equal to men. Actor may sound unfeminine but it's small price comparing to the gain in women's equality. Therefore, I support "actor" be used for acting women.


Hahhahahahaha! Cool! I wouldn't want the use of "Doctress" in lieu of Doctor either! A doctor is a doctor. I hate when someone tries to qualify by saying female doctor or female president or female anything. That's like implying there is a difference in quality of their work. Ugh!

Besides, the word "actor" ends in "or", like in:

preditor,
animator,
visitor,

which are neither masculine nor feminine (and I'm talking about the English language. Nevermind that some of these words may have come from the masculine version of some other Latin-based language). We never should have created the word actress because there was no need for it. It was neutral to begin with. It's not the like "fireman", where the "man" needed to be dropped like a hot potato. I agree that that was politically incorrect. Now, fire "fighter" is neutral.


Good points, MHC ten

Overgrown feminists do not know they are threading a dangerous ground when they begin to fight segregation of the sexes with ... a form of segregation of their own. If "actor" is an offending term to describe a woman then it's logically infering that "actress" is equally offending to a man. Then, segregation is inevitable, and where there's segregation there bounds to be inequality. If the two sexes are pitted against each other, guess which has the upperhand?

You know, if women or men really need to have separate sets of terminology, I rather they be used to describe their uniqueness instead of "actress" vs "actor", which seems to be an abuse of language on top of sexism.
_________________
Oh man!
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageMSN Messenger
Wildflower



Joined: 03 Mar 2005
Posts: 6881
Location: Shuttling between France and the US

PostPosted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:29 am    Post subject: There's a difference Reply with quote

Between words that existed in the feminine form before all this jazz and words which are neutral.

Plus, the feminine form, when it exists, saves you from saying "he or she, his or her" - as in "this actor, what's his or her background?" If a word in the feminine form already exists, why not use it? As to "discrimination", it's a question of perception. As I said, you're both too young to remember the "good old days", or actually not so old - this controversy really started with younger people your age (I almost said "young men MHC's age" - why have a different word for men and women, boys and girls? Isn't that discriminatory? A person is a person, a child is a child) who don't know about how it was before - also, the difference between French/Spanish/German/Italian, etc., and English, the article "the" being neutral in English you can't understand what a difference that makes in other languages, but that's another story.

OK, so, the masculine form being "neutral", you guys ("guys" having become neutral too) would say King Elizabeth or The Prince married the Shepherd??? Rolling Eyes For the latter, one would think it's a remake of Brokeback Mountain. Laughing

Emma Thompson has an article in the current issue of Newsweek and thank goodness for English people speaking and writing good English. She calls herself an actress, bless her.

Since I'm talking to two walls here, this time I'm really outta here.
_________________
My Most Prestigious Award wink
Back to top
View user's profileSend private messageYahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AVENUE VIET Forum Index » The War Room All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group