• bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    The phrase men used to primarily mean all humans in English. This is just nitpicking and using a historical phrase in this way doesn’t exclude anybody or detract from anything, unless you intentionally ignore contemporary use of language.

    • set_secret@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      The terms “man” and “mankind” have historically been used to refer to humanity as a whole, but their continued use is a subtle reinforcement of a male-centric view of the world. To suggest that “mankind” encapsulates all human beings is not just an oversight; it perpetuates a narrative where men are the default and women are an afterthought. This linguistic practice not only erases the presence of women but also reinforces patriarchal structures that have long excluded them from full participation and recognition.

      Language shapes our reality. When we default to male-oriented terms to describe humanity, we implicitly suggest that men are the standard against which all others are measured. This isn’t merely about semantics; it’s about recognising the inherent dignity and equality of all people. Using “humankind” or “humanity” acknowledges the full spectrum of our species, respecting the contributions and existence of everyone, not just half of the population.

      The argument that such terms are convenient or traditional falls apart when we consider the power of language to shape thought. Just as we have evolved from archaic practices and beliefs, our language must evolve to reflect a more inclusive and respectful understanding of our shared human experience. In summary, clinging to “mankind” is not a mere linguistic preference; it’s a refusal to fully acknowledge and respect the equal humanity of women.

      • bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sure, but this kind of advocacy doesn’t belong in conversations about respect for the dead.

        Go after corporate and government uses of words used that way.