The fact that they specifically added “girl” to it while having no indication of the actual gender of the person they were referring to is not just some innocent “oh hey let’s be equitable this might be someone who has feminine gender expression.”
It’s already widely used as a genderless term though - that was the whole point of my initial comment. Both interpretations were correct - it is a gendered noun, and it is a term that describes behavior regardless of gender.
debate pervert
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the term - isn’t this exactly what you’re doing right now?
It’s already widely used as a genderless term though
It’s not, though. You will never hear someone calling a man a “fangirl” unless the person saying it is a misogynist trying to insult that man’s masculinity. Adding a “-girl” or “-boy” onto any word is not “gender neutral” it is literally the opposite of gender neutral and saying that it is is ridiculous at least and possibly disingenuous.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the term - isn’t this exactly what you’re doing right now?
I think you are misunderstanding how human interaction works. No, it is not what I am doing, responding to someone who is using excessive pedantry (and still reaching false conclusions) necessitates addressing the pedantic points they used, but doing so is very obviously not also being pedantic. You really do seem to have a strange difficulty with recognizing how things that may have aspects that are in parity with each other are not therefore intrinsically the exact same thing as each other.
You will never hear someone calling a man a “fangirl” unless the person saying it is a misogynist trying to insult that man’s masculinity.
This is simply not true - hence providing the genderless definition. If we aren’t caring about pedantic aspects like definitions, I also see it used constantly to describe men without insulting their masculinity, often as a self descriptor. For example since it carries far fewer negative connotations than, say, Otaku (a term that has fallen out of favor due to it’s original Japanese meaning…) it is commonly being used in place of former phrases like “going otaku”
Perhaps you and I simply have wildly different cultural experiences, and you have not seen this?
and still reaching false conclusions
Alright, and while you have told me this is false repeatedly, I can point to where the standard non-academic authority for english definitions shows it’s sometimes a genderless term. I have seen no actual evidence that I’m wrong beyond you coming in to assert that I am. And while that may be pedantic, it’s not terribly pedantic nor hostile since my entire point has been that both users were using the term correctly, and that use of a gendered term is not in itself inherently misogynistic.
I’m not sure what about those you’ve got an issue with but I am genuinely curious about your thoughts there.
It’s already widely used as a genderless term though - that was the whole point of my initial comment. Both interpretations were correct - it is a gendered noun, and it is a term that describes behavior regardless of gender.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the term - isn’t this exactly what you’re doing right now?
It’s not, though. You will never hear someone calling a man a “fangirl” unless the person saying it is a misogynist trying to insult that man’s masculinity. Adding a “-girl” or “-boy” onto any word is not “gender neutral” it is literally the opposite of gender neutral and saying that it is is ridiculous at least and possibly disingenuous.
I think you are misunderstanding how human interaction works. No, it is not what I am doing, responding to someone who is using excessive pedantry (and still reaching false conclusions) necessitates addressing the pedantic points they used, but doing so is very obviously not also being pedantic. You really do seem to have a strange difficulty with recognizing how things that may have aspects that are in parity with each other are not therefore intrinsically the exact same thing as each other.
This is simply not true - hence providing the genderless definition. If we aren’t caring about pedantic aspects like definitions, I also see it used constantly to describe men without insulting their masculinity, often as a self descriptor. For example since it carries far fewer negative connotations than, say, Otaku (a term that has fallen out of favor due to it’s original Japanese meaning…) it is commonly being used in place of former phrases like “going otaku” Perhaps you and I simply have wildly different cultural experiences, and you have not seen this?
Alright, and while you have told me this is false repeatedly, I can point to where the standard non-academic authority for english definitions shows it’s sometimes a genderless term. I have seen no actual evidence that I’m wrong beyond you coming in to assert that I am. And while that may be pedantic, it’s not terribly pedantic nor hostile since my entire point has been that both users were using the term correctly, and that use of a gendered term is not in itself inherently misogynistic.
I’m not sure what about those you’ve got an issue with but I am genuinely curious about your thoughts there.