That's no lady, that's [insert teh funny here]
May 15, 2009 7:35 AM Subscribe
Someone used the term "Ladies" in an email subject line to the entire company. Is it an appropriate usage?
Er - probably condescending, probably not appropriate usage.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:37 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:37 AM on May 15, 2009
More info please.
posted by jerseygirl at 7:38 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by jerseygirl at 7:38 AM on May 15, 2009
Response by poster: How the heck did you reply that fast?
posted by theora55 at 7:38 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by theora55 at 7:38 AM on May 15, 2009
I don't see how this is answerable without the whole subject line. Redact if needed.
posted by smackfu at 7:40 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by smackfu at 7:40 AM on May 15, 2009
I use the term 'Gents' all the time when sending emails to all men, but on giving it some thought, I would not use the term Ladies when sending an email to all women. Just doesn't feel right.
posted by Frasermoo at 7:40 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by Frasermoo at 7:40 AM on May 15, 2009
If it was a smallish female-only company where people were generally on good terms, and the content was not condescending, I would be OK with it.
If it was a boss saying something like:
Ladies,
Please be considerate about applying perfume in common areas.
Sincerely,
The Boss
I would be seriously annoyed.
My company is 96% female, and the employees are mostly friendly with each other, but people get offended when you use the colloquial collective "guys" because it refers to men, so we generally use "ladies" or "all" when being informal. I personally don't care either way, but I can understand how it makes people upset.
posted by emilyd22222 at 7:41 AM on May 15, 2009
If it was a boss saying something like:
Ladies,
Please be considerate about applying perfume in common areas.
Sincerely,
The Boss
I would be seriously annoyed.
My company is 96% female, and the employees are mostly friendly with each other, but people get offended when you use the colloquial collective "guys" because it refers to men, so we generally use "ladies" or "all" when being informal. I personally don't care either way, but I can understand how it makes people upset.
posted by emilyd22222 at 7:41 AM on May 15, 2009
If it was a light hearted announcement with the subject line "Ladies and Gentlemen..." that would be fine. If it was something like "HR concerns of some ladies..." or "Ladies, please keep your bathrooms clean!" those would not be cool.
posted by Science! at 7:41 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by Science! at 7:41 AM on May 15, 2009
I think it betrays some cultural tone-deafness, no, I don't think it's appropriate.
The level of outrage I'd feel - eyeroll/forget about it versus walking around all day shaking my tiny fist - would depend on the sender and context.
posted by A Terrible Llama at 7:41 AM on May 15, 2009
The level of outrage I'd feel - eyeroll/forget about it versus walking around all day shaking my tiny fist - would depend on the sender and context.
posted by A Terrible Llama at 7:41 AM on May 15, 2009
Since we don't know the context, it's very hard to say. However, if it was an email geared toward women-only, it would have been more appropriate to use the term "women" instead of "ladies."
posted by ishotjr at 7:42 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by ishotjr at 7:42 AM on May 15, 2009
I think it's important to know if the email was addressed to a staff that happens to be all female or a staff made up of men and women.
(Because honestly, sending an email addressed LADIES to a male/female staff strikes me as pretty funny.)
posted by kate blank at 7:45 AM on May 15, 2009
(Because honestly, sending an email addressed LADIES to a male/female staff strikes me as pretty funny.)
posted by kate blank at 7:45 AM on May 15, 2009
How the heck did you reply that fast?
posted by theora55 at 7:38 AM on May 15
It's a thirty-word question.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:46 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by theora55 at 7:38 AM on May 15
It's a thirty-word question.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:46 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
Was the full subject floating to the side of some Beastie Boys lyrics? If so, maybe. If not, it's probably not inappropriate... unless you're looking for something to raise a stink about.
posted by nitsuj at 7:46 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by nitsuj at 7:46 AM on May 15, 2009
I agree, context needed. A *friend* sending an e-mail about some all-female get together could definitely start it w/ "Ladies". Not a male boss to, say, a largely female administrative staff. To a group mixed in both gender & status at the company? I agree with kate blank; it's funny (though a bit odd). Was the sender an openly gay man? I've heard them use "ladies" in that way.
posted by kestrel251 at 7:48 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by kestrel251 at 7:48 AM on May 15, 2009
If it was followed with "get funky" and then a cowbell, definitely inappropriate.
As it stands - although I wouldn't want to be saying it, it's a phrasing that I would have to remember to avoid, because my thought process would run ' "Ladies and gentleman," no wait this is a female-only thing, backspace backspace backspace, there we go, just ladies'. So probably inappropriate but also probably not intentional?
posted by Lemurrhea at 7:51 AM on May 15, 2009 [7 favorites]
As it stands - although I wouldn't want to be saying it, it's a phrasing that I would have to remember to avoid, because my thought process would run ' "Ladies and gentleman," no wait this is a female-only thing, backspace backspace backspace, there we go, just ladies'. So probably inappropriate but also probably not intentional?
posted by Lemurrhea at 7:51 AM on May 15, 2009 [7 favorites]
Unless every single person in the company is female, it's inappropriate. If every single person in the company is female, it's still not great word choice.
posted by jessamyn at 7:53 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by jessamyn at 7:53 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
I don't see how "ladies" could be offensive unless it was paired with something pretty racy or was intended as derogatory by addressing a core of males (this, I suppose, is why we need the context to make a reasonable judgement). In the second link, someone mentioned that the "ladies of the night" term made the word offensive. If this is so, someone clearly does not understand the history of her own language. "Lady" is a polite term, a formal term for a woman. "Ladies" is simply the plural. In any case one might use the term "gentlemen," "ladies" is also appropriate.
posted by eralclare at 7:54 AM on May 15, 2009 [11 favorites]
posted by eralclare at 7:54 AM on May 15, 2009 [11 favorites]
I address emails like this all the time if the recipients are all female. Is this inappropriate? Can someone please explain so I don't offend more people?
posted by sid at 7:59 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by sid at 7:59 AM on May 15, 2009
Eralclare- It could be condescending/offensive if a person is addressing a group of people engaging in non-ladylike behavior as "ladies."
posted by emilyd22222 at 7:59 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by emilyd22222 at 7:59 AM on May 15, 2009
Eralclare- It could be condescending/offensive if a person is addressing a group of people engaging in non-ladylike behavior as "ladies."
Yes, or if the email discusses some function that "ladies" are supposed to do but that is really the responsibility of the entire staff, like "Ladies - please clean your food out of the staff refrigerator." WTF - why would that addressed to only the women?
In other words, I can imagine situations where "Ladies" is appropriate and situations where it isn't.
posted by muddgirl at 8:02 AM on May 15, 2009
Yes, or if the email discusses some function that "ladies" are supposed to do but that is really the responsibility of the entire staff, like "Ladies - please clean your food out of the staff refrigerator." WTF - why would that addressed to only the women?
In other words, I can imagine situations where "Ladies" is appropriate and situations where it isn't.
posted by muddgirl at 8:02 AM on May 15, 2009
Urbandictionary has a lot of definitions in it. You might as well be going to Encyclopedia Dramatica. I am fairly certain that Urbandictionary has an offensive entry for just about everything — if not, someone is busy working on it. I'll never look at "superman" again, now that I know how it has been transformed into a verb.
Consider the numerous alternatives, then try to shoot each one down. "People," that's kind of irritating. I associate "people" with someone coming into a room and yelling "people!" to get everyone's attention.
"Folks" is apparently out now.
Anyone can be offended by anything. Would you consider "Gentlemen" offensive? Why or why not?
My guess is that, in the rankings of objectionability, "ladies" will be less objectionable than most others.
posted by adipocere at 8:03 AM on May 15, 2009
Consider the numerous alternatives, then try to shoot each one down. "People," that's kind of irritating. I associate "people" with someone coming into a room and yelling "people!" to get everyone's attention.
"Folks" is apparently out now.
Anyone can be offended by anything. Would you consider "Gentlemen" offensive? Why or why not?
My guess is that, in the rankings of objectionability, "ladies" will be less objectionable than most others.
posted by adipocere at 8:03 AM on May 15, 2009
Anyone can be offended by anything
Yes, but the simple fact (that's being ridiculously overanalyzed here) is that a significant proportion of women find the word inherently offensive in most contexts because it comes across to them as condescending.
If you care about not offending these women, don't use it, if you don't care, then do what you like, the end.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 8:06 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
Yes, but the simple fact (that's being ridiculously overanalyzed here) is that a significant proportion of women find the word inherently offensive in most contexts because it comes across to them as condescending.
If you care about not offending these women, don't use it, if you don't care, then do what you like, the end.
posted by game warden to the events rhino at 8:06 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
Would you consider "Gentlemen" offensive? Why or why not?
Yes, Gentlemen or "Gents" can be exclusionary or offensive if a group that is not all men is addressed that way. I know because I have been included in mass-emails addressed to "Gentlemen" and it made me feel like my input/response was not requested nor honored.
posted by muddgirl at 8:09 AM on May 15, 2009
Yes, Gentlemen or "Gents" can be exclusionary or offensive if a group that is not all men is addressed that way. I know because I have been included in mass-emails addressed to "Gentlemen" and it made me feel like my input/response was not requested nor honored.
posted by muddgirl at 8:09 AM on May 15, 2009
I don't find it inherently nasty, but I'm a man and tend to use the word only occasionally, and in attempt to be nice and/or flattering. "Are you ladies here for the meeting" and such, if I were approaching a couple of my coworkers waiting for a meeting room to open up.
Now, saying "girls" when referring to grown women, there's another can of worms.
posted by mikeh at 8:10 AM on May 15, 2009
Now, saying "girls" when referring to grown women, there's another can of worms.
posted by mikeh at 8:10 AM on May 15, 2009
This is ridiculous.
Unless the content of the email was condescending, then there is nothing wrong with the use of ladies. This coming from a staunch feminist. We are, quite literally, ladies. So if everyone in the company is accustomed to informal emails, and is primarily or completely female, there is absolutely nothing to fuss about.
posted by Grimble at 8:11 AM on May 15, 2009 [10 favorites]
Unless the content of the email was condescending, then there is nothing wrong with the use of ladies. This coming from a staunch feminist. We are, quite literally, ladies. So if everyone in the company is accustomed to informal emails, and is primarily or completely female, there is absolutely nothing to fuss about.
posted by Grimble at 8:11 AM on May 15, 2009 [10 favorites]
I have yet to hear of anyone feeling condescended to when the circus announcer starts up with "ladies and gentlemen," so I do not believe the word in and of itself is condescending. "Mister" can be used in a condescending manner. It's all where, when, to whom, the tone, etc. The written word, and especially email, can be a trifle toneless, to be sure, so the tone will be harder to extract here.
This is going nowhere without context. Is it an email to the "ladies who lunch" (a fabulous term with which I have only recently become acquainted)? Is it the "ladies, please clean the refrigerators" alluded to earlier? Who is the audience, who was the sender, and what was the content?
posted by adipocere at 8:19 AM on May 15, 2009
This is going nowhere without context. Is it an email to the "ladies who lunch" (a fabulous term with which I have only recently become acquainted)? Is it the "ladies, please clean the refrigerators" alluded to earlier? Who is the audience, who was the sender, and what was the content?
posted by adipocere at 8:19 AM on May 15, 2009
Any emails I received beginning with 'Ladies,' referred to a bathroom-related matter in the office.
e.g. 'Ladies, the third-floor bathroom is temporarily out of service.'
posted by avocet at 8:19 AM on May 15, 2009
e.g. 'Ladies, the third-floor bathroom is temporarily out of service.'
posted by avocet at 8:19 AM on May 15, 2009
I can't really say that there is anything inherently capital-w wrong with ladies*, but I have yet to see an email or posted note in an office that started out with that word that wasn't ridiculous, so it is generally a symptom of low clue in the writer.
I mean, if it was "Ladies of WidgetCorp, would you be interested in attending a luncheon for the Dignified Ladies of Business Club? Cheryl C on 5 can sign you up." then it would sound silly but not bad, IMO. But let's be honest, it's usually a chills-inducing note about a restroom or something that probably should have been addressed to either everyone or no one, rather than the 'ladies'.
We are, quite literally, ladies.
I think it's worth pointing out that while being a woman is in most cases something that just happens if you start out as a girl and exist for a couple of decades, "lady" has historically been an earned designation that comes with mastering a whole passel of officially feminine behaviors which are both the result of choice and effort, and enforced by threat of ostracism by the society. That is, a lady is a ladylike woman, and you can easily insist that a woman is no lady without bringing her femaleness into question. So, ladies might be technically OK, but it does grate on the ears of women who don't relate to that whole thing (like me). I wouldn't give anyone a hard time about it, but I would also find it a little tone deaf.
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 8:22 AM on May 15, 2009 [5 favorites]
I mean, if it was "Ladies of WidgetCorp, would you be interested in attending a luncheon for the Dignified Ladies of Business Club? Cheryl C on 5 can sign you up." then it would sound silly but not bad, IMO. But let's be honest, it's usually a chills-inducing note about a restroom or something that probably should have been addressed to either everyone or no one, rather than the 'ladies'.
We are, quite literally, ladies.
I think it's worth pointing out that while being a woman is in most cases something that just happens if you start out as a girl and exist for a couple of decades, "lady" has historically been an earned designation that comes with mastering a whole passel of officially feminine behaviors which are both the result of choice and effort, and enforced by threat of ostracism by the society. That is, a lady is a ladylike woman, and you can easily insist that a woman is no lady without bringing her femaleness into question. So, ladies might be technically OK, but it does grate on the ears of women who don't relate to that whole thing (like me). I wouldn't give anyone a hard time about it, but I would also find it a little tone deaf.
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 8:22 AM on May 15, 2009 [5 favorites]
Actually, nearly all of the context isn't necessary at all.
If it bothered or annoyed employees, then it wasn't appropriate.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:30 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
If it bothered or annoyed employees, then it wasn't appropriate.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:30 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
Was it in the context of a message specifically for the women in the company?
"Ladies, please be aware the women's restroom on the third floor is being renovated," sounds more natural than "Women of Acme Corp: please be aware the women's restroom on the third floor is being renovated." And it's certainly more respectful than "Girls, the bathroom is being renovated."
posted by Meg_Murry at 8:33 AM on May 15, 2009
"Ladies, please be aware the women's restroom on the third floor is being renovated," sounds more natural than "Women of Acme Corp: please be aware the women's restroom on the third floor is being renovated." And it's certainly more respectful than "Girls, the bathroom is being renovated."
posted by Meg_Murry at 8:33 AM on May 15, 2009
Mod note: few comments removed - if you can't answer the question without lulzing or eye-rolling at other MeFites, please don't
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:36 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 8:36 AM on May 15, 2009
Response by poster: Ladies, Blah blah National Women;'s Health Month
posted by theora55 at 8:37 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by theora55 at 8:37 AM on May 15, 2009
Condescending or not (and I personally think that it is, YMMV) it isn't professional for the workplace. As much as I love Mad Men I am glad we have moved on.
posted by JoanArkham at 8:41 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by JoanArkham at 8:41 AM on May 15, 2009
Ladies, Blah blah National Women;'s Health Month
In this case the Ladies seems unnecessary at best.
posted by muddgirl at 8:47 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
In this case the Ladies seems unnecessary at best.
posted by muddgirl at 8:47 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
"Ladies, please be aware the women's restroom on the third floor is being renovated," sounds more natural than "Women of Acme Corp: please be aware the women's restroom on the third floor is being renovated." And it's certainly more respectful than "Girls, the bathroom is being renovated."
Maybe (I don't hear the second one as being so weird), but it's unnecessary, because everyone already knows whether the functionality of the women's restroom on the third floor is important to them or not, so you don't have to begin the email differently than you would any other mass mail which is only actually interesting to a subset (i.e. all of them). The 'ladies' isn't there to convey important information, it's there to be chummy, which is also why it runs the risk of irking.
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 8:47 AM on May 15, 2009
Maybe (I don't hear the second one as being so weird), but it's unnecessary, because everyone already knows whether the functionality of the women's restroom on the third floor is important to them or not, so you don't have to begin the email differently than you would any other mass mail which is only actually interesting to a subset (i.e. all of them). The 'ladies' isn't there to convey important information, it's there to be chummy, which is also why it runs the risk of irking.
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 8:47 AM on May 15, 2009
Even if some do consider it offensive, I don't think it's across-the-board enough to be able to fault the email-writer for it.
For instance, I can imagine myself innocently using the term "ladies," and being genuinely flabbergasted that some are offended by it.
posted by nitsuj at 8:49 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
For instance, I can imagine myself innocently using the term "ladies," and being genuinely flabbergasted that some are offended by it.
posted by nitsuj at 8:49 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: It struck a jarring note to me. It was sent to all staff at my location, about 1,200 people; possibly to all staff at every location, about 7,000 people. Trying to word a response, and having trouble defining why it feels icky.
Optimus, not a complaint; I'm always amazed that people are able to formulate complete sentences, with proper punctuation, quickly; obviously I can't.
If the women's bathroom on the 3rd floor is out of service, a simple email can say The women's bathroom on the 3rd floor is out of service. Men have visitors and may need the info.
posted by theora55 at 8:51 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Optimus, not a complaint; I'm always amazed that people are able to formulate complete sentences, with proper punctuation, quickly; obviously I can't.
If the women's bathroom on the 3rd floor is out of service, a simple email can say The women's bathroom on the 3rd floor is out of service. Men have visitors and may need the info.
posted by theora55 at 8:51 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Oh, if it was "Ladies blah blah Women's health month", I think it's not just redundant as in the restroom example, but it's actually the wrong idea to restrict the persons addressed in the mail subject to the women in the office, since there might be men who care about it too.
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 8:52 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by Your Time Machine Sucks at 8:52 AM on May 15, 2009
Hmmm, I can understand the annoyance because the sender felt the need to include that when addressed to the entire company (it's kind of like "listen up, girls! I have an announcement that only little ladies would care about"); however, I don't think it's an offense worthy of response. Minor annoyance.
posted by Eicats at 8:59 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by Eicats at 8:59 AM on May 15, 2009
Women of Acme Corp: reads a bit like 'workers of the world unite' to me.
As muddgirl said, the Ladies part seems gratuitous.
posted by sundri at 9:01 AM on May 15, 2009
As muddgirl said, the Ladies part seems gratuitous.
posted by sundri at 9:01 AM on May 15, 2009
It sounds as if it's only addressed to the female staff, and I'd wonder why they didn't want the men to recognize Women's Health Month. It strikes a sexist tone, as if Women's Health is only important to, um, "ladies."
posted by desjardins at 9:04 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by desjardins at 9:04 AM on May 15, 2009
Mod note: comments removed - you can email the OP if you want to discuss this further, or email others, or go to MetaTalk. Please save "get over it" talk for somewhere else. thank you
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:17 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:17 AM on May 15, 2009
Is the boss from the subcontinent? That is the expected polite usage for addressing groups of women there, and is a sign of respect.
posted by Meatbomb at 9:21 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
posted by Meatbomb at 9:21 AM on May 15, 2009 [2 favorites]
I think my point RE: the bathroom or another women-specific issue, was that the use of "ladies" was redundant at worst. It may be bad writing, but I don't find it disrespectful--if you feel the need to name the group you're addressing (i.e., "Dear colleagues, please introduce yourselves to our new Manager" or "Sports fans, would you like to participate in the office football pool?"), and the common trait among the group you're addressing is that they are female, what other word could you use that would sound right? "Women" sounds awkward, "girls" is inherently disrespectful, and... what else is there?
That said, "ladies" or not, I wonder why Women's Health Month would be an office-appropriate announcement in the first place, unless the office in question is some sort of healthcare communications-related organization, in which case all employees should be aware that the next issue of the organization's newsletter will be devoted to Women's Health Month, not just the women.
posted by Meg_Murry at 9:23 AM on May 15, 2009
That said, "ladies" or not, I wonder why Women's Health Month would be an office-appropriate announcement in the first place, unless the office in question is some sort of healthcare communications-related organization, in which case all employees should be aware that the next issue of the organization's newsletter will be devoted to Women's Health Month, not just the women.
posted by Meg_Murry at 9:23 AM on May 15, 2009
It would sound a bit tone deaf to me, for the reasons outlined by Your Time Machine Sucks. A woman is a person of a particular gender; a lady is someone qualified according to old and stereotypical notions of femininity, with all the sexism that implies. Used by a man in a general email, it sounds excessively polite and therefore condescending.
Better than "girls", though.
posted by fatbird at 9:30 AM on May 15, 2009 [3 favorites]
Better than "girls", though.
posted by fatbird at 9:30 AM on May 15, 2009 [3 favorites]
To me it sounds condescending because to me the word implies more than just a reference to gender, it implies some sort of standard of behavior, or manner. I can't quite pin down my feelings on it, but I don't like it.
posted by gaspode at 9:36 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by gaspode at 9:36 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
having trouble defining why it feels icky
It feels icky because:
(1) Men might care about it too, so it is exclusionary.
(2) It implies that only ladies would or should care about Women's Health Month, thereby belittling the health of women as an important concern of all.
(3) It needlessly focuses on the sex of the workers, rather than them being workers.
(4) "Ladies" in particular has nontrivial negative connotations of social inferiority and deference to patriarchal authority. As in, something labeled as "Ladies'" or "For Ladies" is marked as an inferior equivalent to the thing not so labeled, which is for men, and "ladies" as a term of address is particularly commonly given by a teacher to a group of students.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:39 AM on May 15, 2009 [9 favorites]
It feels icky because:
(1) Men might care about it too, so it is exclusionary.
(2) It implies that only ladies would or should care about Women's Health Month, thereby belittling the health of women as an important concern of all.
(3) It needlessly focuses on the sex of the workers, rather than them being workers.
(4) "Ladies" in particular has nontrivial negative connotations of social inferiority and deference to patriarchal authority. As in, something labeled as "Ladies'" or "For Ladies" is marked as an inferior equivalent to the thing not so labeled, which is for men, and "ladies" as a term of address is particularly commonly given by a teacher to a group of students.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:39 AM on May 15, 2009 [9 favorites]
With regard to the clarified context -- I don't think this context would bother me much. I think so many things are vaguely annoying. I work hard to say "wevs*" whenever and wherever possible.
I think 'ladies' is archaic, I find it silly when my brother uses it (it sounds childish -- like 'What's that lady over there doing'? -- He's 38.). I think there's some regional habits at work, in the midwest, where they are, I think it's less weird than on the urban east and west coasts, where I've lived for most of my adult life. I think it chafes because it implies a feminine code of behavior distinct from male behavior, which is to say a ladylike veneer of not making a lot of noise or being overly opinionated.
However. I'm not sure whether the question here is really 'should you be annoyed' versus 'is it condescending'? I kind of think the answers are no and yeah, a little, but in the context of concerns like parity in promotions/raises/recognition, I don't think that it is particularly important.
The company I work for has almost no female executives above the director level. That to me suggests the kind of sexism that's not just incidental, it's like they're lining up at Sexists R Us and buying up everything in sight. If the biggest problem was the appearance of 'ladies' in an email I'd be delighted.
You could argue that there's a correlation between this archaic term and the institutional sexism I'm describing, but I haven't observed it. I think modern sexists are quietly sexist, they're not loudmouthed Archie Bunkers, they're the type of people for whom female intelligence has really never even been considered. Women don't totally exist. I don't think anyone has even noticed there's no female executives.
*Ironically--a vaguely annoying term! I annoy myself!
posted by A Terrible Llama at 9:40 AM on May 15, 2009
I think 'ladies' is archaic, I find it silly when my brother uses it (it sounds childish -- like 'What's that lady over there doing'? -- He's 38.). I think there's some regional habits at work, in the midwest, where they are, I think it's less weird than on the urban east and west coasts, where I've lived for most of my adult life. I think it chafes because it implies a feminine code of behavior distinct from male behavior, which is to say a ladylike veneer of not making a lot of noise or being overly opinionated.
However. I'm not sure whether the question here is really 'should you be annoyed' versus 'is it condescending'? I kind of think the answers are no and yeah, a little, but in the context of concerns like parity in promotions/raises/recognition, I don't think that it is particularly important.
The company I work for has almost no female executives above the director level. That to me suggests the kind of sexism that's not just incidental, it's like they're lining up at Sexists R Us and buying up everything in sight. If the biggest problem was the appearance of 'ladies' in an email I'd be delighted.
You could argue that there's a correlation between this archaic term and the institutional sexism I'm describing, but I haven't observed it. I think modern sexists are quietly sexist, they're not loudmouthed Archie Bunkers, they're the type of people for whom female intelligence has really never even been considered. Women don't totally exist. I don't think anyone has even noticed there's no female executives.
*Ironically--a vaguely annoying term! I annoy myself!
posted by A Terrible Llama at 9:40 AM on May 15, 2009
Yup, better than girls. I don't get all jammed up about ladies, but you could if you wanted to.
posted by hazyspring at 9:41 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by hazyspring at 9:41 AM on May 15, 2009
Not only is "Ladies" archaic and a little bit... tone-deaf? typecasting?... but I agree that it's reductive to introduce the subject of Women's Health Month by addressing only the women.
Would the same person introduce the subject of Black History Month with an email addressed specifically and exclusively to the African-American staff members? I think not.
posted by Elsa at 10:02 AM on May 15, 2009
Would the same person introduce the subject of Black History Month with an email addressed specifically and exclusively to the African-American staff members? I think not.
posted by Elsa at 10:02 AM on May 15, 2009
I use ladies all the time when addressing a group of females. But I was primarily raised by a woman born in 1904 and have a whole slew of odd speaking habits.
posted by Mick at 10:10 AM on May 15, 2009
posted by Mick at 10:10 AM on May 15, 2009
If the subject was "To all the "Ladies" out there", yes, that's gross and inappropriate. If it's "Ladies, National Women's Health Month...", I think that's fine. At best it's a failed attempt to be kind of cute and not so clinical, at worst it's merely tone deaf.
Would the same person introduce the subject of Black History Month with an email addressed specifically and exclusively to the African-American staff members? I think not.
I think there's a lot for everyone to learn from the social and political issues sorrounding black integration in America. On the other hand, if Dan from Accounting shows up to your "How to give yourself a breast exam" workshop, you're going to be a bit skeeved, no?
I'm not saying Men should be exempt from the going concerns of women's health issues, but there are substantial issues of privacy involved with it.
posted by GilloD at 10:30 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Would the same person introduce the subject of Black History Month with an email addressed specifically and exclusively to the African-American staff members? I think not.
I think there's a lot for everyone to learn from the social and political issues sorrounding black integration in America. On the other hand, if Dan from Accounting shows up to your "How to give yourself a breast exam" workshop, you're going to be a bit skeeved, no?
I'm not saying Men should be exempt from the going concerns of women's health issues, but there are substantial issues of privacy involved with it.
posted by GilloD at 10:30 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Also, maybe being 25 and having been raised in an era where women could do anything they wanted to, "ladies" simply doesn't sound as derogatory?
posted by GilloD at 10:32 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by GilloD at 10:32 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
I strongly dislike being addressed as "ladies" or "girls" or "gals". By women or by men. I think it's condescending and annoying. I much prefer "dudes" or "guys" as a group address, no matter what gender breakdown the group contains.
However, I do like "Lady" singular when it comes from an affectionate friend, as in "Hey lady, how are ya?" That feels sweet and friendly. But "Ladies"? Ugh.
posted by pseudostrabismus at 11:03 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
However, I do like "Lady" singular when it comes from an affectionate friend, as in "Hey lady, how are ya?" That feels sweet and friendly. But "Ladies"? Ugh.
posted by pseudostrabismus at 11:03 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
I'm not saying Men should be exempt from the going concerns of women's health issues, but there are substantial issues of privacy involved with it.
In the absence of further information from theora55, we don't know the content of the message. It might have simply heralded the existence of National Women's Health Month. If that's the case, I would argue that it's a general-interest announcement, not female-specific.
It might be alerting staff members to female-specific medical and wellness programs, in which case it should be addressed to those staff members likely to use those services, or to have family members likely to use the services. In that case, again, it's a general-interest announcement.
I'm trying (and failing) to imagine a scenario in which, as you suggest, "Dan from Accounting" would instruct between 1,200 and 7,000 employees in giving self-exams, or require the communication of sensitive material in a staff-wide email.
posted by Elsa at 11:21 AM on May 15, 2009
I can't hear/read 'ladies' without hearing it all "Hey, laydeez!" so it just sounds wrong to me for business usage.
posted by Space Kitty at 11:58 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
posted by Space Kitty at 11:58 AM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
I am a 50-year-old Southern male, and I believe that I know when to use Ladies and when to use Women. I get the feeling that the term Ladies is dismissive in some contexts, and a tad belittling. However, when I come in in the morning I say, "Good morning, ladies," to my four employees, and would feel foolish saying, "Good morning, women." I would also feel foolish calling them Girls, or not greeting them at all because I am afraid of offending.
Yes, sending a note to the whole company, addressing Ladies, is tone deaf.
Only in my own household do I refer to females as "persons of gender." Then only for a laugh.
posted by Midnight Skulker at 12:01 PM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Yes, sending a note to the whole company, addressing Ladies, is tone deaf.
Only in my own household do I refer to females as "persons of gender." Then only for a laugh.
posted by Midnight Skulker at 12:01 PM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
I received the same email (evidently Theora and I work at the same place) and had a similarly visceral "ick" reaction.
It's just a word that I do not like to hear. Partly because when I was growing up my mother taught me not to use it because it has class implications (that's a lady but that's just a chick/woman/girl) that unnecessarily divide women. (Why yes, I was raised by a feminist. How can you tell?)
I definitely get the vague whiff of condescending Theora mentioned.
(The email from from the wellness office. They send something out monthly reminding us of this or that (stretch your back; it's diabetes awareness month, etc.))
posted by miss tea at 12:06 PM on May 15, 2009
It's just a word that I do not like to hear. Partly because when I was growing up my mother taught me not to use it because it has class implications (that's a lady but that's just a chick/woman/girl) that unnecessarily divide women. (Why yes, I was raised by a feminist. How can you tell?)
I definitely get the vague whiff of condescending Theora mentioned.
(The email from from the wellness office. They send something out monthly reminding us of this or that (stretch your back; it's diabetes awareness month, etc.))
posted by miss tea at 12:06 PM on May 15, 2009
However, when I come in in the morning I say, "Good morning, ladies," to my four employees, and would feel foolish saying, "Good morning, women." I would also feel foolish calling them Girls, or not greeting them at all because I am afraid of offending.
Why not just, "good morning?" They already know they're women/ladies/whatever, and don't need to be reminded of it.
Or to be reminded that (if) that's your primary perception of them, instead of perceiving them first as employees or colleagues.
Miss Manners says that gender does not belong in the work place, and I think that makes a lot of sense.
posted by Salamandrous at 12:22 PM on May 15, 2009 [4 favorites]
Why not just, "good morning?" They already know they're women/ladies/whatever, and don't need to be reminded of it.
Or to be reminded that (if) that's your primary perception of them, instead of perceiving them first as employees or colleagues.
Miss Manners says that gender does not belong in the work place, and I think that makes a lot of sense.
posted by Salamandrous at 12:22 PM on May 15, 2009 [4 favorites]
I've always hated lady, but for a very specific reason. At my high school (let's say we were the Bobcats), the male varsity basketball team was "the Bobcats." My teammates and I were the "Lady Bobcats."
FUCK THAT SHIT.
posted by peep at 1:15 PM on May 15, 2009 [3 favorites]
FUCK THAT SHIT.
posted by peep at 1:15 PM on May 15, 2009 [3 favorites]
Ladies, Blah blah National Women;'s Health Month
I assume you mean this is what the mail subject line was.
You're welcome to find the word archaic or have a personal negative reaction to it. My wife thinks the word "moist" sounds distasteful. That doesn't mean there's a moral bad attached to using the word. "Lady" may have some of the negative associations that ROU claims, but the fact remains that it's not remotely considered a distasteful word in everyday society.
That doesn't mean it wasn't poorly worded, and I don't think there's anything wrong with dropping the sender a note and saying "Suggestion - when you write "ladies" or "gentlemen" in the subject line of an email it encourages people to mentally check out and not read the rest of the message. And there's plenty of things we're doing in Women's Health month that would be useful for our male employees."
posted by phearlez at 1:22 PM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
I assume you mean this is what the mail subject line was.
You're welcome to find the word archaic or have a personal negative reaction to it. My wife thinks the word "moist" sounds distasteful. That doesn't mean there's a moral bad attached to using the word. "Lady" may have some of the negative associations that ROU claims, but the fact remains that it's not remotely considered a distasteful word in everyday society.
That doesn't mean it wasn't poorly worded, and I don't think there's anything wrong with dropping the sender a note and saying "Suggestion - when you write "ladies" or "gentlemen" in the subject line of an email it encourages people to mentally check out and not read the rest of the message. And there's plenty of things we're doing in Women's Health month that would be useful for our male employees."
posted by phearlez at 1:22 PM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Need to remind ourselves the difference between the past and the present. That someone has used or could use a word in a distasteful way does not inherently mean that all uses are off limits.
In other words, context is key.
posted by gjc at 3:13 PM on May 15, 2009
In other words, context is key.
posted by gjc at 3:13 PM on May 15, 2009
However, when I come in in the morning I say, "Good morning, ladies," to my four employees, and would feel foolish saying, "Good morning, women." I would also feel foolish calling them Girls, or not greeting them at all because I am afraid of offending.
Nothing personal, but this is actually a good example of why the term ladies often comes across as vaguely problematic/condescending. If they were all men, would you say "Good morning, gentlemen?" or would you just say "Good morning?" I don't mean to focus on you personally, Midnight Skulker-- maybe you would say "gentlemen"-- but it seems like there's a fair number of people for whom it's not ladies vs gentlemen but ladies vs nothing (the same principle as peep's Bobcats and Lady Bobcats, which happens all the time with mascots)-- using no specific word to refer to men because in some subconscious way they're seen as the default, but feeling the need to specify when you're talking about women. Echoes of the truly awful "doctor" vs "lady doctor" terminology.
posted by EmilyClimbs at 5:56 PM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
Nothing personal, but this is actually a good example of why the term ladies often comes across as vaguely problematic/condescending. If they were all men, would you say "Good morning, gentlemen?" or would you just say "Good morning?" I don't mean to focus on you personally, Midnight Skulker-- maybe you would say "gentlemen"-- but it seems like there's a fair number of people for whom it's not ladies vs gentlemen but ladies vs nothing (the same principle as peep's Bobcats and Lady Bobcats, which happens all the time with mascots)-- using no specific word to refer to men because in some subconscious way they're seen as the default, but feeling the need to specify when you're talking about women. Echoes of the truly awful "doctor" vs "lady doctor" terminology.
posted by EmilyClimbs at 5:56 PM on May 15, 2009 [1 favorite]
It's redundant, not derogatory.
posted by mynameismandab at 6:47 PM on May 15, 2009
posted by mynameismandab at 6:47 PM on May 15, 2009
It doesn't sound condescending to me. But I grew up going to private schools, where the girls were Ladies and the boys were Gentlemen whenever formally addressed as a group.
posted by jacalata at 11:05 PM on May 15, 2009
posted by jacalata at 11:05 PM on May 15, 2009
I think your reply is simply something along the lines of, "Don't you think *everyone* in the company should know about Women's Health Month, not just 'Ladies'? Even someone not personally interested in women's health just might know someone who is . . . "
posted by flug at 6:39 AM on May 16, 2009
posted by flug at 6:39 AM on May 16, 2009
i am the only male employee at my place of work. (not the whole company, but my location) we get notes, cards, etc all the time addressed to "the ladies of xxxxxxxx" as well as emails or memos that open "ladies......" the only one who's ever bothered by it is me. by "bothered" i mean "mildley annoyed". im not about to call the ACLU or anyhting.
posted by swbarrett at 8:07 AM on May 16, 2009
posted by swbarrett at 8:07 AM on May 16, 2009
Good morning all those homo sapeins of the XX genetic makeup,
It has come to my attention that the upcoming month is national homo sapiens with a XX genetic makeup month. We are having certain events in recognition of this event, blah blah blah
Do you really want all conversation to be sanitized to that? What about if someone was a transgender person where would they go? The consider themselves a woman, but genetically they are XY. It isn't disrespectful, it is you being overly sensitive.
posted by koolkat at 7:06 AM on May 21, 2009
It has come to my attention that the upcoming month is national homo sapiens with a XX genetic makeup month. We are having certain events in recognition of this event, blah blah blah
Do you really want all conversation to be sanitized to that? What about if someone was a transgender person where would they go? The consider themselves a woman, but genetically they are XY. It isn't disrespectful, it is you being overly sensitive.
posted by koolkat at 7:06 AM on May 21, 2009
What about if someone was a transgender person where would they go? The consider themselves a woman, but genetically they are XY
On the other hand, koolkat, consider a transgender man who has the biological reproductive system of a woman but does not consider himself a "lady". It's downright dangerous to frame messages about breast cancer and ovarian cancer as woman-only issues.
posted by muddgirl at 7:28 AM on May 21, 2009
On the other hand, koolkat, consider a transgender man who has the biological reproductive system of a woman but does not consider himself a "lady". It's downright dangerous to frame messages about breast cancer and ovarian cancer as woman-only issues.
posted by muddgirl at 7:28 AM on May 21, 2009
Lady is a term of respect. It is still used that way. I would take it that way unless context indicated otherwise. Otherwise, assume it is a person attempting to show respect for women.
If its use bothers you, just indicate that you like to be addressed casually, all-friendly like.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:23 PM on December 27, 2009
If its use bothers you, just indicate that you like to be addressed casually, all-friendly like.
posted by Ironmouth at 9:23 PM on December 27, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 7:37 AM on May 15, 2009