But actor is masculine just as long as actress exists, isn't it? After all and as a general rule, the English language has no inflectional grammatical gender, as far as I can tell.Para afirmar la igualdad las llamais en masculino? Perdona pero en todo el mundo las feministas hacen el contrario de lo que acabas de decir! Promueven el uso del femenino... No del masculino! Nada mas porque las lenguas ya son suficientemente machistas...
English has not grammatical gender in the same way that, for example, Italian, Spanish and French have. Except a few exceptions, when you speak English you don't need to identify anyone or anything with a gender,But actor is masculine just as long as actress exists, isn't it? After all and as a general rule, the English language has no inflectional grammatical gender, as far as I can tell.
You don't have to deal with the "his/her" problem though. I never got the problem of using "waiter" or "waitress." Other languages mark gender on everything. Maybe if English were a bit more consistent there wouldn't be a problem.English has not grammatical gender in the same way that, for example, Italian, Spanish and French have. Except a few exceptions, when you speak English you don't need to identify anyone or anything with a gender,
which is great. Anyway please consider that this is not always true.
I was just replying to the affirmation that "to promote equality, use the masculine form even for a woman". This is never true, and it is exactly the opposite of the truth. No one even just a bit involved with feminism or equal opportunity would have said that.
Maybe there is some part of the story that is missing; maybe there was a social debate about the use of "actress"... I would like to know
Right!I agree with rsb. Mostly, English doesn't mark genders, but when it does, political correctness wants to erase the distinction. While female Spanish medical professionals want "médica", female English dramatic artists want "actor". The former want to be identified in their own right, the latter don't want to be segregated by question of sex. It's a crazy world.
(And, as a female, I've never believed much that attitudes will be changed by modifying grammar - tone and respectful language are much more important, in my opinion)
I think is something wrong in your sentence regarding the ending "-ess". Please, note: prince-princess, emperor-empress, god-goddess, abby-abbess, prior-prioress, Even more, nothing to do with lower wages: lion-lioness, etc.Yes, there is a problem. The ending 'tress' is used mostly for low wage jobs. Waitress, stewardess, seamstress, etc. So for the last years, the 'actresses' don't like to be called as such. So it's not the fact that they want to use the feminine ending, but the low class jobs it was used for.
(Trust me, I have the "luck" of having a daughter who is an 'actor' in N.York, - and she'd kill me if I'd say it otherwise).
There are other reasons : Jewess - slightly derogatory. But the ending is -ess, not -'tress', which seems to be worse.