Thursday, October 29, 2009

Who's sexyist?


Recently Esquire magazine declared English actress Kate Beckinsale the "Sexiest Woman Alive." Given that this is an annual event conducted by the magazine, it's a title she will hold only for a year, after which point presumably she will cease to be sexy ever again.

Sexiness is apparently a fickle suitor.

Given that Esquire doesn't also select a sexiest man alive this practice could be seen as sexist. Of course, given that People is handling that male title it may be more of a copyright thing. It's entirely likely that both are sexist.

Whether the fact that Esquire selected a 36-year-old for the position, ostensibly suggesting to their readership that it's perfectly acceptable to fantasize about women who are technically old enough to run for president (of course, not that Kate is eligible due to matters of citizenship), makes it any less sexist is arguable. They still seem stuck on making their top criterion the requirement that the woman look phenomenal in her underwear, so it's something of a mixed message to the readers: Women are still worthwhile as they transition out of youth but as long as their looks haven't succumbed to the nature of aging.

But hey, the covers of women's magazines are filled with images of good-looking female celebrities as well, so maybe the appeal of being sexy runs hand-in-hand with unavoidable sexism.

What's not debatable: The term "sex" can go both ways (connotation-wise), depending on the suffix applied. (It's also subject to bad double entendres, but that's another story.)

Which brings us to the real purpose of today's post: language rumination.

~

If one takes the root word "sex" and appends "-ist" to it, the resulting term, sexist, pertains to gender; a "sexist" remark is made about a person's sex. However, if one appends "-y" to that root instead, sexy generally connotes something that is attractive in a way pertaining to copulation, i.e., to the act of what (in common parlance) is having sex.

The former is more apropos, as "sex" as a word means being either male or female; "gender" technically pertains to type, but not exclusively to being male or female.

(Ah, the things one picks up while reading books. They have no pertinence to regular conversation, and they make one seem condescendingly erudite, but nonetheless words have particular origins that do not change merely because most people are not aware of them.)

However, the point here is not that the root word is interpreted to mean both. Such is the way language goes; words get used in multiple contexts that differ in connotation. It happens. It's part of what keeps things interesting.

The terms made from the different suffixes are strictly associated with the one meaning of the root word, with no variation that the root word can have. Sexy never alludes to gender, and sexist never pertains to copulation.

Further, the derived terms retain a specific positive or negative connotation. Sexy is always good; sexist is always bad. That's not so much intrinsic to their meanings but from the way those terms have been associated. Sexy gets overused, particularly in advertising, to the point of being almost without impact; sexist suggests a prejudicial insult, but technically could describe an innocuous statement that pertains to something about gender ("Women have ovaries" is sexist in the context of being about a physiological aspect of one sex, but it is unlikely to be thought of as a sexist statement; there's no judgment attached).

And of course, if one takes sexist and inserts another e between the i and second s one gets back to sexiest, and we have come full circle. Sort of.

Something that is without question about all this: Ruminating about the language in this way is not sexy.

~


And now, some abject pandering to the snarky contingent of the internet:

Something else that's probably not likely to elicit an argument: It's lucky for Kate Beckinsale that she is known as the "sexiest woman alive" because with movies like Whiteout she's unlikely ever to be known as "Academy Award winner."

Ba-dump-chik!


~

Go ahead.  Let me have it.  Click the "thoughts on this" link below and go wild.

No comments:

Post a Comment

So, what do you think?