Discussion! Topic # 2: Do you think that Spanish perpetuates patriarchy?

Question

Hey guys!

Here is our second discussion topic. Lets keep it positive and try to get to the bottom of this without hurting any feelings! ; ) We're all here to learn.

I have taken a number of women studies courses throughout my university career. I would say that most people are aware that there are a number of feminist movements in cultures all over the world. If you aren't aware, I suggest you read up because it affects everyone in someway.

I recently began to study Spanish and although I would not call myself a radical feminist I do agree with many of their arguments. There are number of examples in Spanish where feminists argue that the use of some language perpetuates patriarchy. For example when there is a group of females, we can call them "chicas" which is the feminine form but if there is one man in the group we must say "chicos" the masculine form. Also if there is a group of 10 people, 9 male and 1 female we say "chicos".

Why do we not acknowledge the presence of a female in the group? Is Spanish limiting the progression of feminism in our cultures. Why don't we change the language? Should we? And all of those great questions.

Come on guys, ask, suggest, comment. ¡Vamos chicos! ... Sorry Ladies

S

• Hey shanelynch1, just curious, did they offer men's studies as well? - aloshek Nov 20, 2009

Answer 1

HI shane, so support from me on this topic. I think all this political correctness is nonsense and a language cannot be biased.

We have a politician who stupidly used miembros y miembras. The utmost absurdity .

For example this was taken from an official text:

Se hace saber a los ciudadanos y ciudadanas», etcétera. Todo trufadito de perlas como ésta: «Un secretario o secretaria que se nombra por el presidente o presidenta (…) entre funcionarios y funcionarias». Y más adelante, con repetición exhaustiva de las titulares o los titulares, las vocales o los vocales, los presentes o las presentes, el secretario o la secretaria, el presidente o la presidenta, se detalla que en ausencia «de uno de los vocales o una de las vocales (…) se procederá al nombramiento de un suplente o una suplente

This was said by Lazarus on this topic, very rough but this is what many people think:

Spain must be one of the countries with the highest percentage of mentally retarded people in the world, at least among politicians.

That silly illiterate useless piece of... politician will end up calling people "personas y personos", "atletas y atletos". Why don't they send them back to school as soon as they say things like that?

"Miembro" comes from "membrum", a neutral word that was changed to masculine because of its ending, and it meant "part of the body" (member of the body of an animal). Later, in the 14th century its meaning was extended to any person who is part of a larger "body" of people (along with "penis" in slang), and thus we also have "cuerpo" (e.g. cuerpo de policía) to mean a group having different parts. It has always be common to both genders, because the word "miembro" retains still its meaning as a part of the body. We don't say "ÿl se ha dañado un miembro, y ella se ha dañado una miembra". It is absurd, regardless of how common it is used, whether it is accepted or not.

• I miss answers like these - Izanoni1 Nov 20, 2009
• Ay yay, te amo Heidita... =) - DJ_Huero Nov 20, 2009
• She is pretty woman. Ella es mujer hermosa... ¿como se escribiria Ella es una mujer linda o Una chica preciosa? - EdiOswaldo Nov 20, 2009
• And Lazarrus wrote that? - sarahjs Nov 21, 2009

Answer 2

Feminism is not necessarily a good thing for either women, or a language.

Speaking as a member of the (slightly) older generation, I much preferred the days when women were "ladies" and not "females". Being a "lady" brought untold advantages, and I cannot think of a single able lady of my aquaintance and generation who was held back from what she really wanted to do by the mere fact of being female.

As ladies, we were almost universally treated with respect and courtesy by the gentlemen we worked with (and who worked for us) - very unlike the treatment my "female" daughter generally recieves from the "males" she works with.

And I much preferred being "Madam Chairman" rather than the politically correct "Chairperson" that the feminist brigade have turned me into.

So no, I don't think we need to mess with the Spanish language. Mere symantics in terms of speech are not inportant - what is important is the underlying and unspoken recognition that "ladies" are in fact the superior sex.

• What a brilliant post, except for the last comment that is, hehe. If God were to read your last comment, she would be very annoyed. - Eddy Nov 20, 2009
• Translate please:¡ Ni tu te lo crees!. ;) - EdiOswaldo Nov 20, 2009

Answer 3

If anything, I am a feminist (in a restricted sense). I certainly believe in equal wages. I do not believe that men are (in any sense) inherently superior (I don't consider being physically stronger an indication of superiority).

On the other hand, I strongly object to the attempts of people (in practice , mostly women) who wish to revise languages because they perceive a bias. For the most part these people demonstrate a profound ignorance of the languages (and their histories/developments) that they wish to "correct".They are unaware that most of the usages of "man" (as a component of some compound word) originated in an Anglo-Saxon word that did not mean "male" but meant person (of unspecified sex).

They are unaware that the entire notion of "grammatical gender" in some (especially, Romance) languages is not related to notions of male/female. The word in Latin for "farmer" was "agicola" (a feminine noun and one of the first that one learns when studying Latin). In ancient Rome, farmers were, overwhelmingly, men (perhaps, at the poorest levels, assisted by their wives). Later (after centuries of language development), grammars were written and terms were invented to designate various categories of nouns (based, in large part, on the sounds (especially terminal sounds) of the words. These classifications did not mean that that "feminine" nouns (in some sense) applied to women, nor that "masculine" nouns referred to men and, most especially that "neuter" nouns only referred to sexless beings.It had nothing to do with the "sex" of the thing/person/animal/idea (noun) referred to.

In languages with "natural gender" (such as English), gender references (specific forms) have been reduced to the pronouns (which indicate male/female distinctions [as well as, singular/plural]) and the expressed genders do, indeed correspond to the sex of the people referenced. However, most (perhaps, none) of the languages with either "natural" or "grammatical" gender did not develop forms that explicitly meant "male and female". For whatever reason, they thought that is was sufficient to choose the (so called) "masculine" form to designate (whatever/any) mixture of males and females. That said, there are several cases (for example in English) in which one can make no assumptions about sex When one says "We ...", "You ,,," or "They ...", one can be referring to a collection of males, females or mixed gender or a collection of females. Surely, if ones notion of language is that, first and foremost, one must make make clear the sex(es) of the people referred to, then, we would want distinct forms for xpressing "We" (males only, females only, some admixture)., similarly with "you" and "they".

On a different level, I suspect that the entire notion that language reflects the sexist biases of a particular culture is total nonsense. In Chinese, for example, there is almost nothing in the language that tells you the sex of the person speaking/spoken about. Similarly, in Japanese, one can go on for pages without any clear indication of whether the speaker (or person spoken about) is male/female. Despite the "gender neutrality" of the languages, both of these societies are widely recognized as treating women as "inferiors"/"second class citizens".

In languages that have "grammatical" gender, if you insist on asking why is "agua" feminine and "dia" masculine, you're going to have a lot of problems. They are what they are, they have the genders that they have. Spanish is not English with funny spelling (nor is it German, Chinese, whatever) it's Spanish and it has its own rules/history. Live with it!

• I think I just shed a tear...great post Samdie - Izanoni1 Nov 20, 2009

Answer 4

I'll elaborate later, but plain and simple, I think it has to do with the same reason we say, "Let's go guys" in english even if there's a woman in the group. I don't think it's wrong at all, because it's an traditional, unintentional type thing.

Answer 5

As a husband and a male , my role is to protect my wife, to encourage her, to help her understand that she is the queen of the world. My role is to make her feel safe and loved to make sure she knows that I love her just as I love myself. She is to know that I place her needs and desires above my own. While this may seem contrary to what culture believes, it is the right way to treat a woman. And men, in their own goofy and sometimes faulty way, knew this and used to try to live like it.

My wife is not the same as a man. She is certainly not inferior to a man. But she is most assuredly is different than a man. We don't think alike, we don't communicate alike. If fact, if I were to treat her like a man then our communication would revert to grunts, burps and the occasional "pass the chips". If I treat her like a man, I have denied both her and me the pleasure of serving the functions that we are best at; her to be a woman and me to be a man.

I am truly sorry that women don't get paid equal pay for equal work. I am also truly sorry that some have determined that by denying the differences between men and women and neutering the language we speak will solve it. I think it only confuses both sexes. Certainly confuses the men. I am now going to give my wife a foot massage. Something I assure you I would not do with a man! Viva la diferance!

Answer 6

I consider myself a feminist in some regards because in America, what Susan B. Anthony and many other feminsit fought for was the right for a woman to have the SAME rights as man--to be equal. Not to be better, or stronger(because that is genetically impossible, or smarter. But to be equal.

Now the radical feminist of today have taken that too far - which in my opinion is why they are not taken too seriously. I think all languages in one way or another is characterized by machoisim. That's just the way it is, but it's nothing so extreme that all women need to form a rally about.

Answer 7

I agree with Shelia and Heidita on this one. Now I think that women should have the right to vote, but I don't see anything wrong with being a homemaker or a housewife because if you have children especially if you have children and you have plenty of money already to take care of them....well it is a decision to make. Because there are pros and cons to either decision, but its upsetting to me that now that feminists have gotten so carried away that its like if one decides to stay home with her kids for their sake or just because she wants to,people start being judgmental towards them.Like we are setting women back 150+ years!

I mean in English we say stuff like "all of mankind" and many many times in the Bible it refers to all human kind as simply man or all men!

Answer 8

Hey, it's hard enough to learn how to get the genders straight without causing more confusion! At age 50, I'm glad I can still identify with the masculine. Give me another 20 years I'll probably identify with the almost defunct neuter. (In 20 years I'll probably be an almost defunct neuter.)

If you can worry about gender specific language in Spanish; then I envy your Spanish skills too much to sympathize. (Just kidding.)

Answer 9

No lo creo. En absoluto.

La mujer madura es muy sabia; ella comprende que es ella la que en realidad maneja el ambiente emocional de su casa. El hombre puede ser más fuerte físicamente, pero la mujer madura es sin duda mas fuerte emocionalmente.

Estoy de acuerdo con Sheila y con varias de las foreras que han comentado en este hilo.

Me encantan los hombres; llevo varias décadas de casada con el mismo hombre y soy madre de dos hijos varones. Pero ni por un minuto creo que sean superiores por el hecho de ser hombres; ni por un minuto veo que cualquier idioma tenga influencia en la forma de pensar de una mujer madura.

Es ciero que es un tema que rinde buena filosofía en cualquier tertulia, pero -fuera del campo de la filosofía - es pura tormenta en un vaso.

Habiendo dicho eso, voy a subrayar que cada mujer trabajadora debe recibir el mismo sueldo que cualquier hombre en el mismo puesto. No tengo experiencia ni conocimento personal de eso que las mujeres recibimos el 40% menos que los hombres. Puede ser cierto, puede ser falso. Nunca he conocido a ninguna mujer que no reciba su merecido.

• Genial y todo en español a ver si alguien te imita;) - Heidita Nov 21, 2009

Answer 10

In my opinion, using gender specific terms is divisive. Doesn't insisting that I be acknowledged in feminine terms just accentuate all the more that I am not the same as a man, that I am not equal to him? We are all individuals and we are all a part of this wild and wonderful human race. Is it really that important to be distinguished as women apart from men? Does this unite people or build walls? Does this not indicate that we believe that we are so much different from each other as to require special recognition apart from each other? We live in a day and age where this old world isn't that big anymore.

I enjoy being one of the "guys" and I don't feel that I have to be more like a guy to be included or equal. I've been a chairman and it never dawned on me that I might just have been looked down on because my gender wasn't acknowledged in my title. I don't feel that changing a language is going to solve gender problems. What we really need to realize is that we are more the same than different. If we must change a language to acknowledge people so as not to be "offensive" to anyone, my belief is that non-gender specific words are the ones that should be used. We are all people, gentes; all the same, all equal.

Answer 11

Oh, I got this today and we might change our minds then:

zorro = Héroe justiciero.

feminine

perro = Mejor amigo del hombre.

feminine:

aventurero = Osado, valiente, arriesgado.

aventurera=

cualquier = Fulano, Mengano, Zutano.

(una) cualquiera

hombrezuelo = Hombrecillo, mínimo, pequeño.

mujerzuela=

hombre público = Personaje prominente. Funcionario público.

mujer públcia=

hombre de la vida = Hombre de gran experiencia..

mujer de la vida=

heroe = Ídolo.

heroína= Droga.

atrevido = Osado, valiente.

atrevida = Insolente, mal educada.

soltero = Codiciado, inteligente, hábil.

soltera = Quedada, lenta, ya se le fue el tren.

suegro = Padre político.

suegra = Bruja, metiche, etc.

Don Juan = Hombre en todo su sentido.

Doña Juana= La mujer de la limpieza.

Answer 12

If women have achieved equality, why then are they routinely paid up to 40% less than men doing the same work?

I'm ready to rally around that issue on behalf of my daughter who has been in that situation.

• Hmm... No response? No agreement? Am I to assume that such blatant inequality is cheerfully accepted by posters here.? ¡Que lastima! - 0057ed01 Nov 21, 2009

Answer 13

The French language is the same regarding the masculin being used over the feminin when there are members of both genders. I'll bet there are other languages like that as well (latin) and maybe others? Anyway, are we going to try to change all those languages because of that? Sometimes feminism is being carried too far.

To me a language is history, culture and tradition and we should leave it alone, lest we forget along the way how it used to be and where it came from.

Answer 14

I am sure there are nneuropsychological studies I have yet to read about whether language shapes thought or is just a product of thought.Now I am going to have to look them up.

At any rate, language seems to change over time with a people's perceptions as a society though it may be imperceptiable to an individual or in a lifetime.

I just have some personal preferences and can only ask the people close to me make any changes in speech that may rub me the wrong way.