I’d say it’s a expression that does have gender associations, but it’s not offensive or anything to call a woman dude in the right context. If anything it is usually used as a gesture of camaraderie, in this case because a woman has suffered in a way that men can understand.
I get what you’re saying. But what you’re saying could also be interpreted as “you’ve suffered in a way we understand, so you’re not a woman anymore, you’re better, you’re one of the men.”
It’s also like a guy being called “one of the gals” by the gals. That’s not welcomed by most men, even if it’s well meant. I don’t want to be one of the gals. I want to be a guy and accepted.
So I just don’t use “dudes”. I use folks. Same concept, infinitely less ambiguity. Words are great like that. You always have options.
Is dude not back to being gender neutral again? What are we going with?
now that you say, I’m not sure anymore
I think it might be dependent on context, unfortunately/confusingly.
Would you have sex with a dude? If yes then it’s fine
That’s one hell of a standard
Why? If dude is gender neutral, then you should be comfortable using the phrase “I’d have sex with that dude”.
I’d say it’s a expression that does have gender associations, but it’s not offensive or anything to call a woman dude in the right context. If anything it is usually used as a gesture of camaraderie, in this case because a woman has suffered in a way that men can understand.
I get what you’re saying. But what you’re saying could also be interpreted as “you’ve suffered in a way we understand, so you’re not a woman anymore, you’re better, you’re one of the men.”
It’s also like a guy being called “one of the gals” by the gals. That’s not welcomed by most men, even if it’s well meant. I don’t want to be one of the gals. I want to be a guy and accepted.
So I just don’t use “dudes”. I use folks. Same concept, infinitely less ambiguity. Words are great like that. You always have options.
It’s not really the same. I actually wouldn’t mind being called one of the gals.