What do feminists think of use of the term "man" or "mankind" to refer to the human race?

Question

What I mean is like when you see some things, it says thing like "When man first discovered fire..." or "One giant leap for mankind." What do feminists think of that?

Answer 1

Really, how much harder is it to say "humankind"?

Answer 2

It doesn't bother me a bit

Answer 3

I don't know about others but when I hear the word "man" I think of men; when I hear the word "woman" I think women; when I hear "mankind" I think of men.

Other posters are right-human and humankind is accurate and makes more sense when talking about men and women. Am I going to bother fighting over it? No. Just because that's the way it's always been-doesn't mean it makes a bit of sense.

Answer 4

IT PISSES ME OFF!!

Woman has been just as present in history (see! Male dominance all over again! HIS story) as men. And they were revered as the mother Goddess once, too.

Answer 5

Well I'm not a feminist but it doesn't bother me much at all.

Answer 6

The word 'man' refers to human beings in general, not exclusively to males.

Answer 7

it's sexist, be neutral always, that is so not that hard

Answer 8

Originaly, the word 'man' was used to describe people of both genders. A female was known as a 'weaving man' or 'woman' and a male was known as a 'hunting man' or 'human' the terms got switched around the year 1000.

Answer 9

It bothers me a lot.  The words "man", "men", and "mankind" do not include women anymore than the words "woman", "women", and "womankind" include men, no matter what some people might say.  Saying that "men", "man", and "mankind" can be default expressions that include both genders, but that "women", "woman", and "womankind" can't be is blatantly sexist towards women.  

How difficult is it to say "humanity", "humans", or "people"?  Then everyone is included, as it should be.

Answer 10

Eh, it's been used for so long, and entered into common speech so much,  that I'm not particularly offended by it. But at the same time, now that I think about it it is fairly annoying....And also come to think of it, I'm a L*****n, and I don't like the use of 'g*y' as an insult, even through it's been used for awhile and it's in common speech, and I'm Jewish, and I don't like the term 'Jew down the prices' even through it also fits the above criteria. Hmm. I think referring to humans as mankind should offend us, but it doesn't seem to. Or maybe because unlike the other two examples, it doesn't /try/ to offend people. It's just there. Huh. Very good question....

Answer 11

What do you think of the term "womankind" being used to describe all humans?

Really people should just use "humankind."  

It isn't difficult.  I don't propose we revise anything.  However, modern day texts and speeches would ideally use "humankind."

Answer 12

In language, it is possible for things to not be gender specific. For example in the spanish language if there is a group of people, and one does not know if it is a group of all males or all females, or a mixture of both... then one uses "Ellos" to refer to the entire group although it translates to a group of males, because we do not know the specific genders of this group, "Ellos" covers both male and female people, just like mankind refers to a large group of people that includes male and females.... so it as it is the way language works, women should not be offended.