Isn't the word "actress" outdated and sexist, anyways?

[RandomKoolzip]

My wife has informed me on many an occasion that "actress" is not to be used when referring to a female thespian. They're all ACTORS now.

When my wife was casting for a play she'd written, it really rankled her when I'd ask about what "actresses" she had gotten for the roles. This was a few years ago. Since then, I've always referred to performers of either sex as "actors."

Now there's this stupid "Fat Actress" show, and we're back at square one again. Am I alone here?

[sui generis]

1. it's all horseshit

use of the word "actor" can be considered paternalistic too doncha think? Why did we all arbitrarily decide to choose "actor" instead of calling everyone "actresses"?

Makes you think . . .

[arwalden]

6. I Still Refer To Flight Attendants as "Stewardess".

[RandomKoolzip]

7. If Slinkerwink were here, she could straighten this all out for us.

[JohnKleeb]

14. ha what ever happened to her?

[democracyindanger]

18. Got fed up with all the bitching, I think

[CanuckAmok]

28. No, she's here in my silk-panelled love den...

...but she's busy at the moment.

Fetching my paper and slippers...

[JohnKleeb]

32. I thought you two didnt get along

:shrug:

[CanuckAmok]

55. Never underestimate the power of firm, corrective but loving discipline!

Actually, I'm kidding. I don't know where she is, but I'll bet she's still at last weekend's kegger.

[JohnKleeb]

89. whatever man, I just remember you two fighting one night

YOu didnt like her getting on LPFF's case, which I didnt like either since LPFF is a great friend of mine.

[democracyindanger]

40. Ah. She finally learned her place.

:evilgrin:

Good times...good times.

[Misunderestimator]

36. Allow me... Or shall I just call male flight attendants stewardesses?

arwalden... you should be ashamed of yourself. I'd correct you if I was sitting next to you the plane. ;)

[Hardrada]

Not to my sister you wouldn't.

She and her union ( which includes many males) disapprove of the term. Heartily. I found that out one time.

[frylock]

59. that's ridiculous..

the correct term is sky waitress. :P

just kidding folks!

[ronnykmarshall]

66. I call them "air mattresses".

At least back when I was a slut.

[petronius]

102. I think they really prefer 'Jet bunny'

I can tell they like it, because even though they pour other peoples beverages right there at the seat, they always go get me a special cup out of the galley...

[Left Is Write]

35. Well, no....because "actor" isn't supposed to have a

gender-specific meaning. "Actress" is a feminine diminutive of "actor" and is specifically supposed to refer to women.

"Actor" can be used for either gender. It literally means "one who acts."

[petronius]

98. Wouldn't "acter" be 'one who acts'?

I had thought that -or was masculine and -er was neutral. (E.g climber, runner, thrower, comptroller, etc.)

[Left Is Write]

122. Not if you want to spell it correctly.

"-or" is not a male suffix.

How would you explain "accelerator" or "operator"?

[ET Awful]

2. From now on we'll just call them "acting persons" or we could just

fall back on "thespians."

edit: Even better, we could do like we do with "vocalists" We'll call 'em all "actists." :)

[davidinalameda]

5. thespians?

that can be confused, and frequently is, with lesbian

Beula, why do I want to go see a movie with a bunch of thesbians in it?

[sui generis]

8. that's because his wife might be a closet thesbian

and some guys like to watch two thesbians gettin' it on, yee haw!

some girls too.

[davidinalameda]

12. very good point

[JohnKleeb]

15. I like thesbians

:D but I am a heteroguy.

[Left Is Write]

34. Well you know, "actor" does work fine.

:D

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[redqueen]

10. hahahahahahahaha

:loveya:

[VelmaD]

16. Consider taking a moment...

to peruse the revised rules.

[calico1]

4. Well then maybe women should be called

men from now on because "woman" is so sexist. :crazy:

[WMliberal]

19. but wouldn't that make calling men "men" sexist too?

:silly:

[DrGonzoLives]

26. No, it's "womyn" now

Use of that spelling will shatter the patriarcal heteronormative power structure that oppresses everyone.

[redqueen]

9. Yeah, but it's not just the show, IMO.

In many areas people want to put an 'ess' on the end to indicate sex. It's stupid.

[Shakespeare]

11. Yes, it's outdated. We don't call female doctors "doctresses," do we?

I have many women friends in SoCal who are in the "industry," and they all refer to themselves as "actors," never as "actresses."

I don't understand why on earth anyone thinks it's difficult, silly or politically incorrect to just call them all--male and female--actors.

[Hardrada]

13. dentistes, veterinariannes!

real estate agentresses

[redqueen]

17. Astrophysicistesses

Horticulturistesses

Psychotherapistesses

It's SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO stupid!

[WMliberal]

21. "Prime Ministresses"

Generalesses
Admiralesses
CEO-ette?

[baba]

20. For the Oscars.

At the Oscars, I believe they use "Best Female Actor in a _____ Role"

[LilKim]

29. Nope, still actress

http://www.oscar.com/oscarnight/winners/index.html

[Shakespeare]

56. Nope, I think you're thinking of the SAG awards.

They've been pushing the gender-neutral designation for years now; I think the Independent Spirit Awards are following SAG's example now, but I'd have to check to be sure.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

33. Do you feel that the Romance languages should make all of their nouns

non-gender specific?

Or get rid of the articles that identify nouns as male or female?

Also, a hypothetical: Say you're watching TV and there are two actors --one male, one female-- on screen. You don't know their names (character or real-life), and you want to make a comment to your companion about the female one. Would you say:
A. What else has that actor been in?
B. What else has that female actor been in?
C. What else has that actress been in?
D. What else has that person been in?
E. What else has she been in?

Is it ever "right" in your point of view, to use gender specificity when you are trying to highlight or specify a specific person?

(Btw, I'm not trying to start a flame-war here. I'm just a language freak and curious as to your thoughts.)

[redqueen]

42. Um

About other languages... that's just too silly to even address.

As for the situation you describe... that's nearly as silly. What if there are two actresses on the screen? :crazy:

[Tyrone Slothrop]

74. Why is that so "silly"?

You want to apply a standard to English that you think is "silly" to apply to another language.

That seems ridiculous to me.

[redqueen]

85. Because it is!

There is no 'standard' here... I would've thought all the thoughtfully-provided examples would have driven that point home by now.

As for the other languages, they do have more of a standard, so ... whatever.

[Shakespeare]

47. English isn't a romance language.

Since we don't use definite articles preceding our nouns, I find that point rather moot. I'm a language freak, too. I find definite articles to be a bit archaic, but I don't see the Académie française untightening its ass on that issue anytime soon (I speak German near-fluently, and can get by passingly in French and Spanish, btw).

As to your hypothetical question, I always use E ("what else has he/she been in?).

When highlighting a specific person, and referring to his or her occupation, I find gender specificity unnecessary. And I am utterly baffled that anybody on this board seems to have an issue with keeping occupation titles gender-neutral. Absolutely, completely baffled.

[redqueen]

61. Is stodginess antithetical to being a democrat / left leaning type person?

Curmudgeonliness?

I wonder... I suspect it would be, but...

:shrug:

[Left Is Write]

65. Curmudgeonliness?

Is that the feminine diminutive of curmudgeonlin?

;)

[redqueen]

67. hehehehehehe

I suspected someone might say something like that!

:)

[Left Is Write]

68. And I'm just the smart aleck for the job.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

70. I'm confused by a few things in your response

One is in this sentence:
"When highlighting a specific person, and referring to his or her occupation, I find gender specificity unnecessary."

However, when generally highlighting a specific person you are gender specific (unless you always use he/she in general conversation).

Why should there be a difference?

This is one of the confusing things I find about this whole debate. The idea that recognition of gender (particularly female) in a title or in the language itself is bad or insulting implies that there is something intrinsically negative about being female.

I believe that language should generally be more specific, not more vague.

[redqueen]

71. Should we add descriptors for race?

You know, in case there are two actresses on screen, one Hispanic and one Black... we could say... who's that Hispactress? Or who's that Blacktress?

Seriously... it's not insulting, it's just stupid!

[Shakespeare]

72. I don't see why you're confused.

If you're gender-specific in referring to an occupation, that implies that there's a difference (in how the job is performed, etc.). That is completely different than just differentiating between an individual for the sake of identification.

The distinction may or may not be negative (but it is, by its very definition, diminutive)--the point is that it identifies as different, and in a completely unnecessary way.

I think you're missing the point--it's not a good/bad thing, it's a relevancy thing. It should be completely irrelevant whether a doctor, actor, police office, etc. is male or female. There is no need for a distinction, and there's nothing vague about that.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

73. And in regards to the roots of English

Just because English is Germanic as opposed to Latinate shouldn't render the question moot.

Both English and the Romance languages (I'm not very well-versed in German, so I don't want to speak for it) have nouns which are gender specific regardless of the presence or usage of the definite article. For example, the word "bride" in English and the word "bicyclette" en Francais. (And, I would add, the article is not what makes the noun masculine or feminine. The noun itself is either masculine or feminine -- hence the gender-specific variations of the adjectives modifying the noun.)

So, I ask again, since you feel that English should not have any gender specific nouns, do you feel the same way about other languages?

[Shakespeare]

75. I've already answered that question, but I'll go into more detail.

Just to humor you. You're the one who brought up romance languages, and yes, it's rather irrelevant to the ongoing discussion, whether you like that or not.

Of course we have words that are gender-specific (hence, this thread). That's really not the same thing as having definite articles, you know. I'm not sure what comparison you're trying to make here, and don't see it as particularly relevant to the ongoing discussion.

You're twisting my words, too--I didn't say that English should have NO gender-specific nouns. I said that occupation titles and the like should be gender-neutral, because gender is not relevant to what the word defines. And yes, I think that should be the case in any language.

[Misunderestimator]

38. Software Engineeresses

[redqueen]

44. Mechanicesses,

Entreprenueresses, ...

[Misunderestimator]

45. Presidentesses and Senatorinas

[redqueen]

51. Representativessess,

photographeresses,
directoresses,
interior designeresses...

[bunkerbuster1]

46. I dated an actor 20+ years ago

She was fairly militant about the term.

Then again, old habits die hard, hence this cheezy new show title.

[redqueen]

49. Am I the only person

who thinks that the show title may be part of the joke?

I mean for real... part of the humor seems to be taking aim at the way fat WOMEN are treated differently than fat MEN... so saying "Fat Actor" wouldn't really jibe with the whole vibe I get based on what I've read so far about the show.

[Misunderestimator]

53. I agree with you on the Title of the show... I think it is meant as yet

one more irony.

[redqueen]

62. Yay! We agree!

:hi:

[Misunderestimator]

63. That's what I was thinking!

:hi: :)

[Left Is Write]

64. No, you're right.

"Fat Actor" would not have the same effect.

[redqueen]

69. Precisely.

The sex of the actor is pretty integral to the whole point the show is making.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

78. Isn't the sex of the actor usually pretty integral to the point of

the play, movie, TV show, etc.?

[Left Is Write]

80. No. The gender of the actor is germane to the *role* he or she plays, but

is not usually the point of the entire production.

[redqueen]

84. You're missing the point.

The show is about the way she's treated / viewed as a fat WOMAN in the acting business... if she were male, she would be treated / viewed COMPLETELY differently.

Whereas a show about random situations does involve gender issues and therefore requires the actors to fill roles of specific sexes with actors of the same sex, this show is not about random situations. The title reflecting this stupid way of addressing a woman in a profession differently than a man is necessary in order to correctly reflect the point of the show.

[Magrittes Pipe]

22. I prefer the term "actron."

[redqueen]

24. hahahahahahahahah

Thank you. :)

[Left Is Write]

39. Wheeeee!

THAT picture certainly gives "camel toe" a whole new meaning.

You know...I never did like that ill-advised term "waitron" for a server. Makes it sound as though you are being served by....well, by that guy in the picture.

[LilKim]

23. I have a problem in general with people trying to rewrite the language

especially all this 'gender neutral' crap. Fortunately, there seems to be enough of an undercurrent of backlash that words like actress, waitress, and stewardess are going to be in common usage for some time to come.

[redqueen]

25. Yes, thank goodness for regressive backlashes against stuff we don't like.

:crazy:

[Shakespeare]

30. Nobody's rewriting the language, LilKim.

Just trying to do away with archaic words that indicate a non-existent difference/diminution.

on edit: A question--what's wrong with this term being gender-neutral? Why should it be gender-specific?

[Book Lover]

41. Language is rewritten every day

by people like me (I work in book publishing). Why not remake it into something more accurate? "Actor" means one who acts; "Actress" is a diminutive that is applied only to women. Those women the word describes don't want that word used, so we change the word used. What's your beef with that?

[Left Is Write]

43. Language evolves. We aren't still speaking like our colonial

counterparts, nor were they speaking like their Middle Age ancestors.

Languages are alive, and they evolve.

[jdots]

27. does this go back to the days when all actors were male ?

The porn movies from the 17th. century were way ahead of thier times.

[CanuckAmok]

31. All the paperwork we use now uses the neutral "performer" tag.

I like, it, too, because it doesn't discrimiate against performers who can't act.

[Ivan Sputnik]

37. Not really

The word "authoress," for example, is outdated and sexist because an author can be either a man or a woman. Gender (ideally) is irrelevant to the job function there, so it doesn't make sense to specify gender. But the vast majority of acting parts in movies, plays, etc., specifically call for someone of a particular gender. Is "surrogate mother" a sexist term? Should we instead say "surrogate parent"?

[sonicx]

81. 'actor' is gender neutral too so i don't understand your point...

When an news story is done on say...Julia Roberts, why can't they say 'Actor Julia Robert'? Her gender has nothing to do with the story.

[Ivan Sputnik]

127. Not the newspaper story,

But it has everything to do with the types of parts she is hired for, which is her profession. How often has she played a man? It depends on the context, I suppose. In a discussion of generic "acting," as opposed to a specific role, it wouldn't be "wrong" to describe her as an actor. But I don't think it would be sexist to describe her as "the actress who portrayed Erin Brokovich."

[Magrittes Pipe]

48. We wouldn't have this problem if we'd never given women the right to act.

:eyes:

[GreenPartyVoter]

50. Actress, stweardess, poetess. Doesn't bother me as a woman as a bit. I

am a _wo_man, not a man. "-ess" doesn't make me feel less than the male equivilent.

[redqueen]

52. They don't make me angry per se, but I can't help seeing the stupid.

Stupid just screams for attention.

[sonicx]

83. "Man" is not gender neutral in normal everyday language....

"Actor" is. A job title doesn't need a gender connotation. if you are a female lawyer, are you a 'lawyeress'?

[Left Is Write]

111. One of the lawyers who posts here said she was once referred to

as a "lawyerette." Yuck!

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

54. It's setting back the Proper Naming of Female Actors Movement a decade

:(

[redqueen]

58. hahahahaha

I love this place. :D

[RandomKoolzip]

60. That's what I'm on about!

I'm glad you see things my way. Now pass the syrup.

[Borgnine]

57. It's ridiculous.

What next? Will they want the vote?

[Lone Pawn]

76. Actress is perfectly acceptable.

As is waitress.
As is stewardess.
As is actor.
As is steward.

Female form of a word is not automatically offensive.

[Shakespeare]

77. Now tell my why it's relevant.

To the job, that is.

and edited to add: Just who determines what is acceptable, and why?

[Book Lover]

88. Copy Editors, for one

and the publishers/editors they answer to.

[sonicx]

90. Copy Editoress' too?

[Lone Pawn]

92. Editress isn't a word.

It's one of the few -or words that isn't gendered.

[sonicx]

94. really?

http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/Editress

1 definition found

From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 :

Editress \Ed"i*tress\, n.
A female editor.
<1913 Webster>

[Lone Pawn]

100. I have it showing up in one of six dictionaries I looked at.

So while I suppose the case can be made for it being a word, it really isn't used in common English--or at all, for that matter. When used, it seems to be a rather fanciful way of emphasizing the gender of the editor in a manner that waitress and actress lack.

Although I suppose I must technically concede the point.

[sonicx]

104. Why isn't is used in common language?

yet 'actress' is?

There is no need to note someone's gender in a job title.

"Actor Julia Roberts." what's the problem?

[Book Lover]

113. Probably because it's not euphonious

"Editoress?" Yargh!

[Left Is Write]

97. But "actor" isn't gendered either.

"Actor" does not mean "male thespian." The word "actor" itself is gender-neutral, meaning only "one who acts."

[Shakespeare]

120. The AP blue book (and others like it) are continually updated.

And I'd look for that to be amended in the near future.

You still haven't told me why it's relevant or important for gender-distinguishing words like "actress" to stay in the lexicon.

[Book Lover]

123. Perhaps you are

replying to someone else. I did not say that "actress" should stay (or go, for that matter).

[Shakespeare]

124. Sorry, you're correct. I'm responding to Lone Pawn.

Who, as I suspected, would choose not to answer that particular question.

[Book Lover]

129. Indeed. I myself

am waiting for someone else upthread who I think may not be back to reply. Then again, I too have had to drop conversations because of this silly thing called work getting in my way...

[Dookus]

119. well

if I'm a director and I need somebody to play a woman, I might want to indicate "Actress needed". Unless Harvey Fierstein is available.

[Shakespeare]

125. That, too, is on the way out.

SAG/AFTRA has worked very hard to phase out that word. It's simply unnecessary.

[Dookus]

126. I don't argue that it's necessary

I just think it's sometimes helpful. It adds a little more information, and conveying information is the point of language.

[Misunderestimator]

79. It is to some... especially females

if you can imagine...

[Lone Pawn]

91. I'm just using strict English.

For example, I find nothing wrong with the word 'niggardly.' It comes from Middle English 'nigard,' meaning 'stingy.' It predates the racial slur by a millenium. But yet it's now offensive. I don't use it, but it annoys me that a perfectly good word is banned because of its unfortunate similarity to an extremely unacceptable word.

As for the general acceptablility of the above words--in common parlance, they are acceptable, and are generally safe to use. However, it's also generally acceptable to ask others to use nongendered words IF an actual nongendered word exists.

For example: asking people to say "fisherperson" or "chairperson" is ridiculous. First of all, the 'man' in 'chairman' is not gender-specific. It comes from 'mann,' meaning 'person.' One would not say 'huperson.' Human is the word, as is chairman. However, if it offends, the words 'angler' and 'chair' are perfectly acceptable, as they are legitimate, valid words.

Although the most annoying bastardization of 'man' was someone attempting to use 'personual' instead of 'manual,' apparently unaware that the root of manual is not 'man', but is instead 'manus,' or latin for hand.

[Left Is Write]

93. I agree with you on "chairman" and the like, in that

it isn't really intended to show gender.

[Misunderestimator]

99. It is not at all the same as the word "niggardly" which has nothing to

do with what people assume by its sound. The "ess" is DIMINUTIVE... I was lucky enough to have been more of a singer than an actor, and there is no diminutive/female form of the word singer. In other languages, the gender is everywhere, but in English it is only with certain terms. I find no reason to add a suffix to a profession just because a female is the one in the profession. It IS sexist... as much as describing adult women as "girls."

I find nothing wrong with "Chairperson"... why would you? I find it a noble attempt to bridge the gap between the genders in positions that are normally held by men, but had NO female term for them prior to the "person." No matter if it came from Mann, which also means "man" or "husband" in addition to the less common "person" meaning. The point is that here, man means man.

OTOH, I don't spend too much time worrying about this particular battle, since there are so many other manifestations of sexism that need to be destroyed.

[Lone Pawn]

105. -ess isn't a diminutive.

Now, keep in mind, I'm not talking about what people around you might have used. I'm using English.

Just as -or is attached to a verb to make a male noun, -ess is attached to a verb to make a female noun. It's no more actress is no more intensely 'female' than 'actor' is intensely male. I would say it's as sexist as describing adult female humans as the gender-specific "women" instead of the genderless "people."

I dislike "Chairperson" because the 'man' in chairman is not a male term, and therefore no female term is required. A woman who is a chairman is no more a 'man' than a woman who is a human. While it's certainly easy to mistake the 'man' for meaning 'male human'--as it is to mistake niggardly for a racial reference--it does not mean man, and as such in strict English no female form or alternate ungendered form is required for balance. Moreover, an ungendered, less-unwieldy form--"chair"--does exist and did exist.

[Misunderestimator]

109. You and I will not agree on this. I am a woman... and I find the gender-

neutral terms more respectful. Society changes... our vocabulary should as well.

[Left Is Write]

110. "-or" is not added to make a "male noun."

"Actor" is not a "male" word. It is gender-neutral and can be used for both males and females.

"Actress", on the other hand, is only used for females.

[Misunderestimator]

114. Thank you. Very succinctly put.

[sonicx]

116. Really! Do you call female doctors "doctoress"?

[Left Is Write]

106. There is a diminutive term for female singer.

It's "songstress." Fortunately, its usage is rare.

[Misunderestimator]

115. Yes, you're right.... Can you imagine calling a male singer a "songster?"

[Left Is Write]

118. It reminds me of a discussion my mother had with her newsgroup.

They are a bunch of quilters.

I don't know how the conversation started, but someone used the term "seamstresses" to describe the group, and that was objectionable to some because there were also male members of the list. That got people going about the word "seamster", which no one uses.

Suggestions flowed, and although "sewer" seemed appropriate, it has its obvious disadvantages in a written medium!

[Misunderestimator]

121. A prime example... I guess the word would be "tailor" for which there

really is no female term... so even MORE diminutive is to use the word "seamstress"... very interesting.

[sonicx]

101. niggardly isn't 'banned.' I've hear/read people use it even after the

silly incedent.

i've never heard someone ask to use 'fisherperson,' btw. Sometimes I hear 'chairperson,' but rarely.

[sonicx]

82. to some it is. otherwise, this thread won't have been made...

[Lone Pawn]

96. Yes, to some it is offensive.

But since anyone can claim offense at anything, it's best to have codified standards of the English language--that way, truly offensive words can be blacklisted, and language fads and minority protests can be ignored. At the moment, I believe that use of 'waitress' and 'actress' are generally considered perfectly acceptable.

[Pithlet]

103. Feel free to ignore minority protests

By all means...

[Lone Pawn]

107. That certainly isn't what I meant by minority.

Even if, say, less than 5% of the population is deeply and truly offended, I would be more than happy to alter the language--so long as such an altercation is done universally. Ambiguity just leads to misunderstandings, and that generally hurts whatever cause is being advanced.

By "minority" I meant things like "people who believe the French in French Fries is offensive."

[Misunderestimator]

112. I believe that much more than 5% of the population is offended.

And the only way to alter language universally is to do it, not to wait until someone else decides.

I don't understand your comment about French Fries at all.

(edited for typo)

[Pithlet]

128. I know what you meant by minority.

My point is I don't see why it's so hard to say "Actor" instead of "Actress" when you know that there is the possibility of offense. This doesn't go just for you. I've never understood what the big deal was. No one is talking about permanently altering the usage of the English language. Although I wouldn't put actress on the same level offensively as some other words, but I still don't think that's the point. Just say actor. It's not that hard. Personally, it doesn't offend me, I just think it is archaic and useless, like comedienne, which has pretty much gone out of usage altogether.

[sonicx]

108. Saying that something is 'gay' is generally accepted too...

fuck minority protests...

[redqueen]

87. IMO it's stupid.

:hi:

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

86. Only when use in reference to Arnold Schwarzenegger...

Otherwise it's OK by me.

[Shredr]

95. Hillary Swank refered to herself as

"a working actor" in her Oscar acceptance speech. That made me think along the lines of what you're talking about here.

[RPM]

117. female lesbian - is there any other kind

oh - you said thespian.... nevermind....