… uh oh 
9 Likes
3 Likes
?? Males who regularly drink apparently have increased rates of prostrate cancer, but that is plausibly directly due to the ethanal that arises during the breakdown of ethanol. Sorry - the only cancer example I can think of that is almost certainly due to a weird correlation rather than due to direct exposure to ethanal is an example that only works for cis females.
If I’m correctly remembering an episode of “Scrubs”, cis males do sometimes have tiny amounts of breast tissue, so there is a very low probability of them developing breast cancer, but I suspect the probabilities are so low that the researchers won’t be able to make any statistically robust conclusions about whether alcohol consumption changes the risk. Sometimes obese cis males might look like they have breasts, but it’s fat tissue rather than breast tissue, so doesn’t create extra breast cancer risk.
1 Like
Try using “women”. We’re generally called women.
6 Likes
Oh - Sorry. I misinterpreted you’re emoti.
We’ve made major progress into reducing underage drinking in the last 20 years, so yeah, it probably would have been safe to refer to women rather than using a term that also includes girls. Not sure now if I deliberately chose the age-independent form for that reason or I just unconsciously parroted the scientific language of a summary report I saw.
(It does really bug me when old school friends who have completed more than 60 of our earth years still call themselves girls.)
1 Like
The issue with using females instead of women is not because it includes girls. It’s because it’s primarily an adjective, and using it as a noun is dehumanizing. Men are rarely referred to as males, but women get called females way too often.
ETA: And I want to make it clear that I am not accusing you of intentionally dehumanizing women. But this kind of language, in my experience, is a huge red flag that I may be interacting with someone who doesn’t view women as equals. So if you don’t want to be perceived that way, I would suggest you stop using the word females in that manner. I’m not the only one who sees that as a red flag. It’s why @smulder replied to you with an “uh oh.”
6 Likes
Thanks. That makes sense. Now you mention it, I can remember some research summaries referring to female and male subjects rather than females and males. At least I can claim to have been consistently dehumanising when referring to males and prostrate cancer.
I hadn’t noticed this gender bias before, but now you’ve pointed it out I expect it will become something I notice and will be irritated by.
4 Likes
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
