Poll: Do you think this is sexist?

[Housebroken Lunatic]

How is it not? It's useful because it conveys information that tells you something about the person. That can be useful in a whole host of circumstances.

Besides, the very use of the word "landlord" conveys maleness. I now know if I want to go over and invite them for a drink to get to know them, I'm safer taking beer than wine.

It's not useful because the title is a professional one. I.e it's work related, and we've been having enough sexism and gender-discrimination in professional settings as it is, so I really can't see the relevance in having to know the gender of someone being refered to by their work-related title.

It's like saying that instead of a woman being called a "boss" she should be called a "bossette" just so you controlfreaks can peg them on beforehand.

Get with the times and accept the fact that a work-related enviroment should be genderblind.

Also, you do know that the title "Firewoman" isn't even a word right? So how would a pedantic person like you refer to a female fireman? See the difficulty in insisting on gender nominative titles in work-related context, when some professions simply don't have gender nominative titles?

 

[lollypopalopicus]

actually, wouldn't saying landlord, policeman or anything else for that matter when its female, actually be sexist by implying that its something only males do?

 

[Kotaro]

I've seen people complain when I don't use the female pronoun.
I feel you're correct, OP. Gender-specific terms are not st all sexist, because they can convey important information.

 

[Brainpaint]

The thing about landlord is that there is a LORD in it. They are the LORD of the LAND... If they are male. The female equivalent of a lord? A LADY.
Actor however, doesn't fall into that problem. They are ACTing and they are ORators. Actress doesn't linguistically make any sense. Builder is the same. Accountant, Teacher, Doctor, Athlete, Cab Driver, Author, Artist, etc.

A policeman is a MAN that works for the POLICE. A mailman is a MAN that delivers your MAIL. They don't need to be that way however. There's plenty of ways where we can make ones like these gender neutral. Police OFFICER, mail CARRIER, garbage COLLECTOR and many others. The more we use them, the more we get used to them and the less stupid "You said that so you're being sexist!" there will be.

It isn't really sexism that the OP described anyway, it's incorrect grammar. But SHE could always have used "Land OWNER". So by her logic if YOU are be sexist, then so is SHE!

If somebody's making that much of a fuss over language not being gender neutral enough, they should look at French. Everything is described as male or female. Funnily enough, though, describe male genitalia and give it a male pronoun and you're grammatically incorrect there. The same happens the other way around. But that's beside the point. SOme languages are very gender specific and can't really be changed. Others can. English is one of those languages. It just requires a bit of effort.

 

[Lionsfan]

I thought it was sexist to use Generic male terms for everything. After all in Hot Fuzz the correct term is Police-Officer rather than PoliceMan since that is sexist

 

[Blow_Pop]

I find no sexism in it. By definition, sexism is discrimination against someone in a profession based on their sex(if I am recalling correctly). And saying "landlady" "policewoman" "actress" etc is NOT sexist. It is defining someone's gender and profession. I do it all the time as well.

 

[Madara XIII]

Nobody likes having their speech corrected with a fine-tooth comb.

Indeed. Do I think the term "Landlady" is sexist? Nope. I just attribute it to being more feminine than "Landlord" which could be either gender.

[sub]Political correctness... My arch nemesis...[/sub]

Damn PC! DAMN IT ALL TO HELL! Quick Redlin5 we storm those Politically Correct Anus Dwellers at dawn!!

Also, if you refuse to join me comrade, the know this....

[HEADING=1] I WILL END YOU!![/HEADING]

I will re-write the laws of physics with my rage!
Now have a nice day

 

[Mandalore_15]

How is it not? It's useful because it conveys information that tells you something about the person. That can be useful in a whole host of circumstances.

Besides, the very use of the word "landlord" conveys maleness. I now know if I want to go over and invite them for a drink to get to know them, I'm safer taking beer than wine.

It's not useful because the title is a professional one. I.e it's work related, and we've been having enough sexism and gender-discrimination in professional settings as it is, so I really can't see the relevance in having to know the gender of someone being refered to by their work-related title.

It's like saying that instead of a woman being called a "boss" she should be called a "bossette" just so you controlfreaks can peg them on beforehand.

Get with the times and accept the fact that a work-related enviroment should be genderblind.

Also, you do know that the title "Firewoman" isn't even a word right? So how would a pedantic person like you refer to a female fireman? See the difficulty in insisting on gender nominative titles in work-related context, when some professions simply don't have gender nominative titles?

Yeah, but you know what? Women aren't allowed to become "firemen" in my country, so frankly it's not an issue. If they were, however, I'm pretty sure they would be called "firewomen".

And you honestly can't see any circumstances whatsoever where knowing someone's gender beforehand is remotely useful or even just convenient? Like you're expecting to meet your landlord and when a woman opens the door you ask to see him, when really it's her?

Seriously dude, I'm starting to suspect you're the Escapist's resident troll...

 

[Ragsnstitches]

I was born with a penis and matching balls so I'm automatically a chauvinist pig.

Are you sexist? Yes.

Why? Because this world is fucked up.

Honestly, sexism is only sexism when the one gender says something that devalues the opposite and means it, or says it in a jest but the other gender has no sense of humour.

 

[zehydra]

No, sexism is a belief that all people of a specific sex are one way or another.

You were not discriminating against women by being specific about a job title.

 

[bdcjacko]

In this case you were being sexist. Why would you go from landlord to landlady?

 

[DementedSheep]

I thought landlady was the correct term? Dose it sugest a lower status? Unless you were acting shocked that they were female I don't see how it's anymore sexist than using he or she.

 

[zehydra]

It acknowledges a difference in gender.

Sexist? Yeah.

A big deal? A huge social injustice? The sigil of doom for society? No.

How is calling someone a woman sexist?

 

[zehydra]

In this case you were being sexist. Why would you go from landlord to landlady?

How is it sexist exactly?

 

[Nisselue]

In this case you were being sexist. Why would you go from landlord to landlady?

Umm...because the landlord was a lady?

 

[Mandalore_15]

To be 'taken aback' and have to question it, after learning a woman holds a job you assume only men have, is sexist.

Clearly you didn't read my post properly. Try again.

 

[Giest4life]

It acknowledges a difference in gender.

Sexist? Yeah.

A big deal? A huge social injustice? The sigil of doom for society? No.

How is calling someone a woman sexist?

Well, it's virtus dormitiva. It is sexist by the very literal definition of the word. Identifying the gender of someone or something, even if it's not meant to be derogatory, is still sexism, just not in the traditional sense of the word.

 

[bdcjacko]

In this case you were being sexist. Why would you go from landlord to landlady?

How is it sexist exactly?

In this case you were being sexist. Why would you go from landlord to landlady?

Umm...because the landlord was a lady?

Because gratuitously correcting someone who used a gender neutral word to a gender specific is on the sexist side. But in the end, there are more important things to worry about.