richw@ada-uts.UUCP (08/26/85)
I have a simple (?) question. I've been stumbling over my words recently when referring to members of the femalian gender. I feel comfortable referring to the males I know of as "guys", but lack an appropriate word for the females I know (even that doesn't sound right, for some reason). The problem is that "guys" is a nice middle-ground between "boys" and "men". What is the equivalent between "girls" and "women"? Rich "New-To-The-Net-So-Have-Mercy" Wagner
neal@weitek.UUCP (Neal Bedard) (08/30/85)
In article <20800001@ada-uts.UUCP>, richw@ada-uts.UUCP writes: > > I have a simple (?) question. > > I've been stumbling over my words recently when referring to > members of the femalian gender. I feel comfortable referring > to the males I know of as "guys", but lack an appropriate word > for the females I know (even that doesn't sound right, for some > reason). The problem is that "guys" is a nice middle-ground > between "boys" and "men". What is the equivalent between > "girls" and "women"? > > Rich "New-To-The-Net-So-Have-Mercy" Wagner "Gals". "Guy" and "gal" are both fairly low diction, slang-ish words, maybe appropriate for conversation, but not in writing unless the nature of that writing is informal (this sounds like a job for William Safire :-)) I like to use "folk" informally, myself, since this tends not to subdivide the people I am describing along gender lines, unless I explicitly mean to. Gee, if "guys" is the `middle', does it separate the men from the boys???? -Neal -- "whaddya mean there were bullet-holes in his mirror..." UUCP: {turtlevax, resonex, cae780}!weitek!neal
mroddy@enmasse.UUCP (Mark Roddy) (08/31/85)
<> boys<>girls women<>men (uh oh...) guys<>dolls It would pass on the SATs. -- Mark Roddy Net working, Just reading the news. (harvard!talcott!panda!enmasse!mroddy)
todd@scirtp.UUCP (Todd Jones) (09/03/85)
> The problem is that "guys" is a nice middle-ground > between "boys" and "men". What is the equivalent between > "girls" and "women"? > > Rich "New-To-The-Net-So-Have-Mercy" Wagner How about (no flames please) ... gals? It's kind of fifties but it has the same slang effect
mmar@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Mitchell Marks) (09/13/85)
All right, Todd, no flames, but really .... `gals' ?!
Conceivably it would have the charming 'fifties flavor you mention if the
two terms are used together: Okay, guys-and-gals, listen up because...
But by itself, it just won't wash. I'm not even trying to make an
argument about whether or not it's reasonable for people to take offense
at it, just posting the social observation that surely it *will* give
offense.
The problem with `gal' is that it entered General American as a
re-standardized version of a regional pronunciation of `girl'.
I'm not positive of that as history, but in any case that's the way many
people have it in their mental lexicons. So it's tantamount to `girl',
and you know the problems with *that*.
To address the original question: no, drat it, there doesn't seem to be
a good word for young women who are actually too young to really be
called women; nor for the other use of `guys', an any-age casual bonhommie.
[P.S. Todd, I miss your little face-drawing.]
--
-- Mitch Marks @ UChicago
...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!mmar