this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2026
27 points (90.9% liked)

No Stupid Questions

49342 readers
1001 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm not a native English speaker, so forgive my ignorance, but isn't "women" a noun, not an adjective? Why not just say "female artists" or "female writers"?

As a side note, I've also literally never seen anyone say "men artists" or "men writers". What gives?

all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hedders@fedia.io 7 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

I'm not a native English speaker, so forgive my ignorance, but isn't "women" a noun, not an adjective? Why not just say "female artists" or "female writers"?

The English language is unusual in that it doesn't have gendered nouns, so we find other, often quite clumsy, ways to indicate it. You're right that it doesn't make sense grammatically; we say it that way simply because it scans better.

As a side note, I've also literally never seen anyone say "men artists" or "men writers". What gives?

Patriarchy. Society defaults to the male. That's not unique to the English-speaking world, of course.

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

As a side note, I've also literally never seen anyone say "men artists" or "men writers". What gives?

Patriarchy. Society defaults to the male. That's not unique to the English-speaking world, of course.

By this I meant that people more often say something like "male nurse" than "man nurse", but I agree, fuck the patriarchy.

Because male nurses are uncommon and in that specific circumstance female is the default that most people assume.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 1 points 3 hours ago

Yeah. Regarding gendered nouns, it can be hard to deal with referring to a professional of an unknown gender since the default is generally male.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

I never saw anybody using women artists, women writers etc

[–] PoastRotato@lemmy.world 44 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (4 children)

To add on, I've found that referring to women as "females" in anything other than formal or scientific contexts has adopted something of a sour taste in recent years. The practice is often associated with incel/misogynistic behavior and ideology, probably because it implicitly strips women of their personhood and reduces them to their sex. Put another way, both a female dog and a female human could be called a "female", but only one could be called a "woman".

That's my own two cents though, take them with a grain of salt.

[–] riskable@programming.dev 7 points 8 hours ago

In my writing, if I'm going to refer to someone as "female" it's usually because I'm also going to refer to someone else as "male" in that same context.

This new trend is kind of annoying because I wrote a book about sapient magical sugar gliders and since they're not humans, I referred to them as "male" and "female". That made the writing feel way too parochial and, well, awful so I came up with special words for male and female children and adults for the species instead.

Young females were called "kaydees" and the males were "keedos". The species as a whole was named "kads".

I actually had a reader say it was "a bad smell" that I used the word "female" too often (they did a search for that but not "male", sigh).

[–] toast@retrolemmy.com 9 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

I recognize that "female" is sometimes taken this way now, but I seem to remember a time when it was the use of "woman" as an adjective that seemed more problematic. I grew up watching TV reruns from the 50s & 60s, and in shows from that era, you'd hear characters intended to be seen as sexist railing about "women drivers", "women reporters", etc. To my (admittedly young) ear, part of the insult or intended derision in these terms came from the intentional clunkiness of the terms. As no one would say "man driver" or "man reporter", it made the phrase "woman driver" seem unnatural, and by extension then the idea of a woman driver unnatural. If the characters had used the more clinical sounding "female driver", it would likely only come off as equivalent to "male driver", and so lose much of its punch.

I realize that there is now some ick associated with some uses of the word female, but if efforts aren't made to reclaim it, I think we are doomed to it becoming strictly pejorative - and who wants that?

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 11 points 10 hours ago

Yes, that is if you turn "female" into a noun, which does sound weird and dehumanizing, but using "women" as an adjective just sounds incorrect. Maybe people do that because they try to avoid saying "female" at all costs to avoid being accused of misogyny or dehumanization.

[–] schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works 14 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (2 children)

Lots to unpack here.

First: female/male vs women/men. Female/male is usually used in clinical settings and for animals. Using female/male is implicitly dehumanizing. And I think this is a common trait of most romance languages: macho and hembra, for instance, are used primarily for animals in Spanish. Tell us your language and I'm guessing someone can explain it in your language.

Second: Nouns can function as adjectives: race horse, history teacher, ticket office. I think "woman writer" also implies that the writer is writing for a female audience.

Third: "Female artist" is actually OK in my book because it's used an an ADJECTIVE and the really offensive use is "females" as a noun. "Do you see those females over there by the bar?" But I think it can be a case of overcorrection to avoid "female" as adjective.

There's a funny one that I heard: "lady senator." So dainty and refined.

Fourth: MALE is the default in patriarchal societies. If you refer to someone without specifying gender, the assumption is that they're male (and let's face it: probably also white).

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 12 points 10 hours ago

In my language (Slovenian) all nouns are gendered, so we don't really use adjectives to gender nouns. And yes, I agree, saying females or males does sound dehumanizing.

Thanks for the explanation!

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 5 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Second: Nouns can function as adjectives: race horse, history teacher, ticket office

I believe those are called attributives.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 9 points 9 hours ago

I always think the best solution is to start using feminine nouns more, like writress.

[–] quill7513@anarchist.nexus 8 points 9 hours ago

woman/women/men/man are both adjectives and nouns. english is fucked because it's a bunch of different grammars that all jumped another language in alley and then made a new language by wearing that language as a skinsuit, and then conquered most of the world.

we don't refer to "men artists" or "men writers" because the hegemonic standard within our society is the masculine perspective. so we sometimes have to draw attention to "this artist is showing you a woman's perspective" to draw attention to that the arts and culture that you see by default show an incomplete view of the world. i look forward to the day the feminine perspective is common enough that we either just call everyone artists or have to start differentiating perspectives to ensure we fully understand the ramifications of what we're seeing

[–] NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 9 hours ago

But you do probably hear things like male nurse or male nanny. (For this comment I'm ignoring the difference between male/female and man/woman, others have already tackled that.) It's pretty obvious what's going on, isn't it? For those professions, people normally imagine them in one gender by default unless other clues are given. You can argue all day about whether it's right or wrong or justified or whatever, but in any case, it's true. And if it's important for the speaker that the listener knows from the start what to imagine, then they add the explicit gender.

Not related to the answer but your post reminds me of a dark joke: it's not true that there's a pay gap between men and women. It's just that men tend to choose higher paying jobs like doctor, lawyer, pilot, while women choose lower paying jobs like female doctor, female lawyer, female pilot.

[–] CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago
[–] chocrates@piefed.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

As a side note, I’ve also literally never seen anyone say “men artists” or “men writers”. What gives?

Sexism. It's "normal" for a male to do it and exceptional for a female.

It's bullshit.

That being said context is key, it could be fine depending on what it is in and about.

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I have seen people say "male artists" (though much less often than the female equivalent), just not "men"

[–] davad@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Saying "male nurse" is a thing. And for the same reason (misogyny).

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 1 points 5 hours ago

Yeah, but I haven't seen "man nurse" used much as opposed to the other option.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Not all women are biologically female

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] LavaPlanet@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

I think it's more that woman is singular, in that context and female is plural. Usually when people denote gender in a description, because fuck the patriarchy, they're referring to one person not a whole group of writers, artists etc.

[–] Solumbran@lemmy.world -4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

A woman isn't necessarily female.

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 5 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Right, but I think it's pretty clear from context that in phrases like "female artists", "female" is used as an adjective that includes all women, and saying "women artists" just sounds clumsy tbh.

[–] Solumbran@lemmy.world -4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know, using new pronouns can also sound clumsy, doesn't mean it's a bad idea.

The strong implicit links in language between sex and gender are not really helping anyone, and a bit of clumsiness for a while isn't such a big cost.

I don't know if that was the intention of the example you mentioned obviously.

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Eh, I don't think "female" is exclusively used to refer to sex. Language is subjective, so there is no objective definition of words that are used to describe something as complex as gender or sex.

Per Cambridge dictionary:

female adjective (GENDER)

belonging or relating to women or girls:

  • she was voted the best female vocalist
  • she was the school's first trans female athlete.
[–] Solumbran@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago

Female has meanings that mean "female sex", woman doesn't.

Language influences and even if theoretically, female can mean woman, it still adds an implicit link to sex.

As you said, language is subjective, so even if a dictionary says that female can refer to women, in practice as someone else pointed out, you can talk about a female dog, you can't talk about a woman dog.