Unless used in an obviously derogatory context, all modern usage of "chick" that I've heard (American English) has basically been equivalent to "dude" for men. Most people I hang out with (men and women) toss around "chick" and "dude" equally as a friendly and casual way to refer to an unnamed individual.
Yes, but the social context of men and women in professional environments is different. Causal terms like this carry a lot more baggage for women, who have had to fight for decades to be taken seriously in the workplace. "Chick" is more likely to remind somebody of all the times they have been talked down to than "dude" is.
Obviously not everybody responds this way but we should be aware of the context.
S. Jeong herself seems not to be too worked up about it: I am not "this chick," I have never been "this chick," the correct label is "yonder youthful poultry".[1]
HN has an international audience, and cultural norms are different in different regions.
Very roughly in English workplaces you should avoid calling any of the women "chick" because you'll cause grave offence.
There are very narrow exceptions to this. In places like Stoke on Trent you might find people calling each other "my duck" (but this isn't just women; men call each other "me duck" too.) But even there you need to know the person and know it's ok.
In this particular example: I'm uncomfortable with the use of "chick" and it makes me think less of the writer, even after the explanation that it was an alternate to "dude". People can use whatever language they like, but they should be aware of the effect of the language they chose on other people so they make an informed choice.
On the equivalence of "chick" and "dude" - I would say they are equivalent terms, and both inappropriate in the workplace. It's just easy to cause offence by using dude in the wrong context. This usage of chick triggered a red flag for me as well, but rereading his comment I could see that the context was respectful. Since this isn't a workplace, I think it's fine.
Agreed. I'm amazed the comment got such a negative reaction. I can't think of anyone I know who would be happy about being called a chick, however casually.
You have to remember that a minority group will often attempt to reclaim a derogatory term as their own to take the bite out of it. A great example is the term "Yankee" back during the American revolution, but I am sure you can think of a more recent term this has happened to.
Where I come from (central US), "chick" is similar to "dork" in that it can, but doesn't necessarily, have derogatory connotations. It depends a lot on context. It's perfectly acceptable (though slightly cheeky) to call oneself a dork in public, but you typically wouldn't call someone else a dork unless you were already on very familiar terms with that person. And you would only do it in familiar circumstances. Doing it with someone you don't know very well, or doing it in public, would be considered offensive. Doubly so if you don't know them and it's in public.
Chick operates the same way, only it's got even more cultural baggage because it features in a lot of memes that are associated with sexism (e.g., the phrase "cruising for chicks").
So I wouldn't even dream of presuming that it's OK for me to call someone else a chick in public, even if I knew them to be a founding member of Chicks who Code.
I realize that the original poster was probably just trying to be cute. But, as John Scalzi famously observed, "The failure mode of 'clever' is 'asshole'."
There's some who self identify with it, Skepchick and The Dixie Chicks come to mind, but it can be considered somewhat derogatory, dismissive, or at least belittling in some contexts to some people.
I think context and age matters a lot here (as well as personal preference) - young women and (especially) girls may use the term amongst themselves but middle age women almost certainly wouldn't, if you called your boss "chick," it would be seen as inappropriate, belittling and disrespectful. It's in the same category (but not "severity") as other diminutives like sweetie, honey, babe, girl, girly, and doll.
It may vary by region too, I know at least certain diminutives don't have the same connotations in the American South as they do elsewhere.
In general, you should probably avoid calling an adult woman you are personally unfamiliar with "chick" in many contexts, not necessarily because "PC police," but because it's just bad for communication - its not necessary and it can be a distraction from the actual message you're conveying.
Personally, as a woman approaching 40, I can't think of any context I'd care to be called "chick" in. Not necessarily offended but it would be just icky.
Yeah, I think the issue is a casual/familiarity vs. professional/formal situation distinction more than a politically correct one. Dude/chick make sense in casual situations where one has some familiarity relationship with the other person. They aren't often terms one would use in a formal or professional relationship.
I suppose the interesting question to ask is does HN think of itself as more of a professional/formal discussion community than one that leans towards casual/familiar?
(I'd assume that the answer is that it probably varies with comment writer and both sides of the argument are represented here and have fair points.)
I suppose the interesting question to ask is does HN think of itself as more of a professional/formal discussion community than one that leans towards casual/familiar?
I don't speak for everyone, I'm merely speaking in observation: the former is the status quo, the latter I have seen completely derail threads (we're in one one of those box cars right now) and in my own opinion, which is mine and no one else's, not out of maliciousness (or at least, rarely so), but because of the clash when subscribers of the first group run into subscribers of the second group...
I guess I wish I had so few problems and concerns of my own that I had time to be offended for people i don’t know. Especially on something so innocent and common.