Back to the hijack - I am 49 years old and this weekend wore a Under Armour t-shirt that said “pure girl power.” I guess that makes me a bad person/woman, according to some posters? (It’s actually a youth shirt but I am small enough to wear a youth size large and I loved the shirt so bought it!)
[QUOTE=GoodTimes;8633138]
As a blanket statement I think that’s a bit ridiculous, but maybe that’s because I work in medicine. People are animals, they are male and female.[/QUOTE]
Of course they are. But you are using the words as adjectives, not nouns. I use them that way in reference to people, too. I talk about “female opinions” or “male speech” all the time. However, I don’t use these words as nouns (except in reference to animals), and I’ll bet you don’t either. Would you refer to the “females” in the waiting room? I didn’t think so.
[QUOTE=Dewey;8634921]
Of course they are. But you are using the words as adjectives, not nouns. I use them that way in reference to people, too. I talk about “female opinions” or “male speech” all the time. However, I don’t use these words as nouns (except in reference to animals), and I’ll bet you don’t either. Would you refer to the “females” in the waiting room? I didn’t think so.[/QUOTE]
Physical therapist here. In healthcare “female” is absolutely used as a noun. As an acute care (aka hospital) PT, my evaluations typically begin with something like “Patient is a 65 yo white female admitted with…” You will see the same in documentation produced by doctors, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, occupational therapists, etc. Sorry if that bothers you, but that is standard practice.
Also, my friends and I definitely refer to each others as “girls” rather than “women” or “gals.” For example, we’re taking a girls’ trip to Savannah next weekend. As others mentioned, I think this is a generational thing. I’m in my mid-20s.
Oh, and Kaley’s horses are absolutely lovely. 
[QUOTE=Swedish Oxer;8635041]
Physical therapist here. In healthcare “female” is absolutely used as a noun. As an acute care (aka hospital) PT, my evaluations typically begin with something like “Patient is a 65 yo white female admitted with…” You will see the same in documentation produced by doctors, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, occupational therapists, etc. Sorry if that bothers you, but that is standard practice.
Also, my friends and I definitely refer to each others as “girls” rather than “women” or “gals.” For example, we’re taking a girls’ trip to Savannah next weekend. As others mentioned, I think this is a generational thing. I’m in my mid-20s.
Oh, and Kaley’s horses are absolutely lovely. :)[/QUOTE]
OK, I stand corrected. Your use of it in this medical way is certainly appropriate. I still maintain that it wouldn’t be appropriate in other types of contexts, but I see that in the medical field, it’s appropriate to use as you describe.
[QUOTE=red mares;8634589]
I would but I have less than zero respect for any horse owner who schills for the ASPCA.
Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.[/QUOTE]
Returning to sidetrack #2 (from sidetrack #1…). What are your feelings then about all the riders who compete in Maclay classes each year?
I thought ASPCA was okay and it was the HSUS (or something with an H) that were the crazies?
[QUOTE=AmmyByNature;8635157]
I thought ASPCA was okay and it was the HSUS (or something with an H) that were the crazies?[/QUOTE]
They’re all nuts. ASPCA has been calling the NYC carriage horse care substandard & cruel for years, despite being the agents charged with ensuring good treatment. It’s “cruelty”, but they’ve never brought any charges for substandard care. Gives me a headache to think about it.
One could argue that many of the riders in Maclay classes are to young to realize what the sponsor stands for. I would have a load of respect for any kid that passed on the competition based on ASPCA sponsorship. I can’t give adult ammies and pros who support those organizations any sort of a pass. They are old enough to know what they are supporting or being paid to support.
[QUOTE=LadyB;8631450]
I also love Kaley! I love how she’s ‘just like us’ ammy’s. Obviously well funded because of her career, lucky girl, but she is just enjoying her hobby. I absolutely love her, and definitely stalk her instagram account because of it! We need more like her. Same as the Olsen girl, she’s under the radar and just loving her hobby :)[/QUOTE]
“the Olsen girl”…
really?
[QUOTE=beowulf;8635178]
“the Olsen girl”…
really?[/QUOTE]
Replace “girl” with “guy” and tell me if you’re still upset. We’ve spent like two pages discussing how for a large portion of the population, “girl” is just a female “guy.” If Chris Hemsworth started riding you’d better believe I’d call him “the Thor guy” and calling Mary Kate Olsen “the Olsen girl” isn’t any different.
And now I’ve used the word female, which is also not acceptable or something?
Maybe we can just focus on her horses? This thread has become a parody of political correctness…
[QUOTE=AmmyByNature;8635192]
Replace “girl” with “guy” and tell me if you’re still upset. We’ve spent like two pages discussing how for a large portion of the population, “girl” is just a female “guy.” If Chris Hemsworth started riding you’d better believe I’d call him “the Thor guy” and calling Mary Kate Olsen “the Olsen girl” isn’t any different.
And now I’ve used the word female, which is also not acceptable or something?
Maybe we can just focus on her horses? This thread has become a parody of political correctness…[/QUOTE]
AmmyByNature, I read your reply - I don’t think your lack of education justifies saying “girl” when the Olsen twins are 29.
Let’s be clear here:
GUY is age neutral. It is also now gender neutral too.
GIRL implies a child.
BOY implies a male child.
Maybe if you were saying “Olsen Boy” you might have a case and you’d still be wrong. It is demeaning and incorrect to refer to an accomplished woman as a girl.
[QUOTE=beowulf;8635198]
GUY is age neutral. It is also now gender neutral too.
GIRL implies a child.
BOY implies a male child.[/QUOTE]
Sure - except when it doesn’t.
Words change. Meanings change. To lots and lots and lots of people, girl does NOT imply a child.
It just doesn’t.
It can, but it doesn’t in this case, as anyone who is reading for comprehension and not with an eye to make an issue of something would realize.
I’ll do what every English teach in the world says not to do when writing an essay - I’ll post a definition.
Webster’s dictionary says:
Full Definition of girl
1
a : a female child from birth to adulthood
b : daughter
c : a young unmarried woman
d sometimes offensive : a single or married woman of any age
2
a : sweetheart
b sometimes offensive : a female servant or employee
So the first definition is just that - a female child from birth to adulthood. The fourth definition says it can be considered offensive. So maybe we shouldn’t jump right to the offensive one?
nevermind. not worth it.
[QUOTE=AmmyByNature;8635204]
Sure - except when it doesn’t.
Words change. Meanings change. To lots and lots and lots of people, girl does NOT imply a child.
It just doesn’t.
It can, but it doesn’t in this case, as anyone who is reading for comprehension and not with an eye to make an issue of something would realize.[/QUOTE]
To lots of uneducated people, maybe. 'The Olsen girl" - would you say “The Jobs boy” or “the Gates boy”?? What about “the Jung boy”? “the Boyd boy”? The point is that you use the correct word to describe something and the correct word to describe a non-juvenile female(gender) human is woman.
Really. It’s the same as referring to women as ‘females’ in a non-medical context. “All them females is crazy” - the only time I hear ‘females’ (again, non-medical) and ‘girl’ used to describe a woman it is coming out of the mouth of someone who is extremely uneducated and misogynist. And usually as an insult.
Your argument “girl vs guy” is moot - it is “girl vs boy” as the opposite of a girl is boy, not “guy”.
[QUOTE=beowulf;8635198]
AmmyByNature, I read your reply - I don’t think your lack of education justifies saying “girl” when the Olsen twins are 29.
Let’s be clear here:
GUY is age neutral. It is also now gender neutral too.
GIRL implies a child.
BOY implies a male child.
Maybe if you were saying “Olsen Boy” you might have a case and you’d still be wrong. It is demeaning and incorrect to refer to an accomplished woman as a girl.[/QUOTE]
Girl is generational. As in, for a certain generation, calling someone a girl is just fine, especially in this context.
If I was at work, and a subordinate called me a “girl” it would not be okay. But that is because I am a manager and most of the people who work for me are older.
However, I call my friends ‘girl’. I call my friends ‘boy’ sometimes too if the occassion warrants it. There is nothing remotely sexist about it. If you want to get into it, it may be ageist?
Who determines how someone uses a word. I just looked up the term ‘guy’ , used as a noun it could be used to describe a man or a boy.
It also refers to someone badly dressed.
I looked up girl to. It refers to a woman, from birth to full growth. Who determines the end of growth? It also states it informally could mean that it states “She is having the girls over”. Something I say more then “I am having the ladies over”. Clearly I am sexist and ageist.
Oh - also adore Kaley.
[QUOTE=beowulf;8635218]
To lots of uneducated people, maybe.[/QUOTE]
Seriously?
I think the point is why choose a sometimes offensive word when there are so many others to choose from that are less problematic?
Ms. Olsen, the Olsen rider, the Olsen twin, the actress that used to be on Full House and now rides horses, etc.
[QUOTE=Foxglove6;8635223]
I think the point is why choose a sometimes offensive word when there are so many others to choose from that are less problematic?
Ms. Olsen, the Olsen rider, the Olsen twin, the actress that used to be on Full House and now rides horses, etc.[/QUOTE]
I just think my generation (I am 30) doesn’t even remotely think of it as offensive in that context so it doesn’t resonate.
From dictionary.com
"Some adult women are offended if referred to as a girl, or informally, a gal. However, a group of adult female friends often refer to themselves as the girls, and their “girls night out” implies the company of adult females. Also, a woman may express camaraderie by addressing another woman as girl, as in You go, girl! or Attagirl! "
So I get that to some people it may be. But calling someone uneducated, or saying that they are ruining the female fight by using that term is going over board. I think it’s quite the opposite. It’s telling that new generations don’t even care. It’s not offensive because it isn’t. We have other issues to tackle now.
However, like I said before, if someone who worked for me, or even I worked for, called me girl, or even young lady in a working atmosphere, that I would take issue with.
If “girl” is offensive, we’ve become way too thin-skinned, in my opinion.
I have friends who greet me “hey girl.” At my age, I’ll just take it as a compliment instead of being offended!
I can think of a lot of things to be upset about but someone referring to another person as a “girl” is really not one of them. I guess I can throw my college degree out the window because I am simply an uneducated low life (deemed such by the clearly superior beowulf.)
And you better tell Beyoncé to change her song - Who rules the world? WOMEN (not girls, apparently.)
[QUOTE=Foxglove6;8635223]
I think the point is why choose a sometimes offensive word when there are so many others to choose from that are less problematic?
Ms. Olsen, the Olsen rider, the Olsen twin, the actress that used to be on Full House and now rides horses, etc.[/QUOTE]
^
Words are important. Their correct usage is important. For clarity’s sake, if you are referring to an accomplished, adult individual you do not call them the juvenile form of their gender.
You would not call Boyd Martin the Boyd boy, or Phillip Dutton “the Dutton boy”. Why is it appropriate to call Mary-Kate the “Olsen girl”? Lord Helpus is right, the sexism is alive and well in this thread and that some of you would justify it by saying “oh well other people say/do it, the word has evolved, etc” – 
The word has evolved because it has been used disparagingly and incorrectly and women still adopt/accept its’ meaning. In formal situations it is not appropriate to refer to an adult woman as a girl. Would you call your (woman) boss a girl? boy?
I’m in the Boston area. Women in the professional field are not referred to as “girls”, nor are men in the professional field referred to as “boys”. And if they are phrased in either way you can bet that it is meant in a demeaning manner. “Gal” and “guy” are not appropriate either.
