As many of you probably know, some women these days take issue with being referred to as "girls" or as "females". I could literally link you several articles written about this very topic.

Their reasoning is this: words matter, nuances matter, and the specific terms we use to describe groups of people shape our collective perception of them.

In common language, the word "woman" and "girl" are often interchangeable. However, the word "girl" also refers to a child who is female. By blurring the language here, even if most people intend nothing bad, there is a subconscious link. Women argue they will be taken less seriously as a result, and also that it's infantilizing to have the same word for both adults and children.

Similarly for the term "female", women take issue that it reduces them to purely their biological sex, as if that's the most important thing about them. It also strips away their humanity. Instead of a person with experience, they're seen as a more collective group, more akin to animals.

Obviously, not all usages of these terms are intended to be problematic (because both men and women use the terms), but all in all, the point is this. By using those words interchangeably for women, it causes a blurring of the lines which has long-term negative consequences on how society views and treats women. To be completely honest, I actually kind of agree. That's why I've moved away from them, and only use the term "women" to refer to, well, women.

However, there is a massive logical contradiction/hypocrisy for some women champion this. They do the very same thing when complaining about men, by linking them as predatory or misogynistic. Given the fact I'm on this sub, I probably don't even need to explain it, but I will for completion's sake.

A lot of women write online about how the men they've interacted with have mistreated them, but they often times describe it in ways that many men argue generalizes them. Just a few weeks ago on this very sub...

"Men consistently treat us as inferior... Men try to have sex and relationships with young women so that they can groom and control them."

Earlier today, I saw a post on a women's subreddit that literally said "every man" wants to manipulate women. If I were to sit here and collect women saying things like this, i would literally be here all day.

Many men are quick to respond, by highlighting that "not all men" are like that or do those things. And women are often times frustrated by this, assuring they don't mean "all" men, but rather their collective experience with men. In fact, men are routinely mocked or told they are "missing the point" or "centering themselves", just for saying "not all men".

But this is where the hypocrisy lies. If you believe that specific word choice matters because it shapes perception, you cannot consistently defend generalizing "men" when you actually mean "misogynists" or "predators." If words have consequences, then they have consequences across the board.

If it is harmful to use a term that dehumanizes or miscategorizes women because of how it shapes societal perception, then it is also harmful to use a blanket term that lumps all men in with predators and abusers. And saying "you should know we don't mean all men" is a weak defense when you refuse to accept the same hand-waving from people who use "female" or "girl" casually. A lot of people (again, even women) mean no harm using those terms. They're not trying to blur any sort of line, or result in poor treatment of women. They're not even thinking about it. Yet it's still harmful.

Here's my summarized logic.

Using the terms girl or female for women, results in blurring the line between a woman and a child or animal. This is because words have meaning, and this linking negatively affects the long-term perception of women. But using the blanket term "men" to describe predatory or misogynistic behavior, also blurs the line between ordinary decent men and predators/abusers. Again, words have meaning, and blurring this line negatively affects the long-term perception of men.

You can't have It both ways. If you want precision in language to protect your own demographic from unfair perception, you are obligated to extend that same charity to others.