3

Is there anything that implies that a "host" (noun- e.g. host of an event) is a male? Is there anything preventing a female from being host (as opposed to a hostess)?

In context: An organization holds a weekly event. One of several representatives from the organization hosts each event, and both genders are in the group of potential hosts. Thus, is it sufficient to say "please contact your host..." or would this be inappropriate considering some of the representatives are female?

Jack Ryan
  • 1,244
  • 6
    258,000 instances of she is the host in Google Books would suggest that you don't have to use *hostess* if you think it's "sexist". – FumbleFingers Jul 26 '13 at 16:53
  • "She is the host" is a construction that eliminates ambiguity, which is an argument that it would be acceptable, but it may still be misinterpreted in a more ambiguous context. – GetzelR Jul 26 '13 at 17:05
  • 1
    It's also worth pointing out that quite a few of those examples (paging through the first group of pages) use host in the context of a TV or radio show. Hostess is either not used or rarely used in that context which eliminates the probable misunderstanding in other contexts, like "the host of the party." – GetzelR Jul 26 '13 at 17:10
  • Related (not a dupe): http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/76147/gender-neutral-forms – MetaEd Jul 26 '13 at 17:38

3 Answers3

10

The answer to this may well be dependent on the local culture.

In the UK, I certainly would not assume that a host is male.

Moreover, if using the word hostess, I would perhaps be careful of context for the reasons apparent from the definitions in Chambers Dictionary:

hostess noun
1. a female host.
2. a woman employed as a man's companion for the evening at a night club, dance hall, etc.
3. euphemistic a prostitute.
4. an air hostess.

Thus, some female hosts may well prefer not to be referred to as a hostess.

Additionally, the first definition given for host is:

host noun
1. someone who entertains guests or strangers in his or her own home.
(emphasis added)

Thus confirming that host is an appropriate term irrespective of gender.

TrevorD
  • 12,206
  • 1
    Trevor, but, at least, can there be a sense of sadness when using "host"s to refer to a hostess? Also, if there are two "host" and you call "HOST!", a man and a woman, who of them feels called for fist? –  Jul 26 '13 at 17:28
  • 3
    In the UK people never issue commands such as: "Waiter" or "Host!" It's considered extremely rude. – Mari-Lou A Jul 26 '13 at 18:17
  • 1
    @Carlo_R., neither should feel called for first, it's equally applicable. See also: actor or waiter – Amory Jul 26 '13 at 18:21
  • @Mari-L, yes, but, in other words, the fact is that, I disagree with the answer because "hostess" designates a specific femal social role, so can be rude to call "host" an "hostess" the same way it is offensive to call "prince" a "princess". I.e., one should avoid the suffix -ess only when it undermines women's right to equal opportunity in the job market, and surely, as I said, this in not the case of "hostess". –  Jul 26 '13 at 18:26
  • 1
    Fair point but host is nevertheless acceptable for both sexes, and avoids the word association with the "archaic" Air Hostess. (That's in the UK, not sure about the USA) – Mari-Lou A Jul 26 '13 at 18:29
  • @Amor, at least for the former you are wrong, since gender is essential to the parts they play, and well rewarded in starring roles; for the rest see what I commented above. –  Jul 26 '13 at 18:32
  • @Carlo_R. I respectively disagree. Gender may be important for the role, but need not be essential to the individual playing that role. If the character is female, it may still be played by a male or a female. Award categories exist because, quite obviously, the words do, and The Academy is in the business of giving more awards to more famous people. Plus, if there were only one category, Daniel Day Lewis would edge out Meryl Streep every year, it would be boring. – Amory Jul 26 '13 at 18:45
  • @Amor, I think there is a divergence in opinions here. However, with all the respect, I never would go to see a movie where the part of Juliet is played by a man, sorry. –  Jul 26 '13 at 19:03
  • 1
    @Carlo_R., I'm actually going to an all-female production of Romeo and Juliet next week, I'll let you know how it is! – Amory Jul 26 '13 at 19:21
  • 3
    @ TrevorD: This answer definitely strikes the right note with me (well, I suppose it would, us both being Brits and all! :). I'm surprised there seem to be so many social/linguistic conservatives wanting to hang on to *hostess* when quite clearly it's very likely to be interpreted as offensive/condescending by so many others. Hostess cooks, empties ashtrays, and hands round party nibbles while "host" sits on his fat MCP arse chatting with "his" guests? Not in today's Britain! – FumbleFingers Jul 26 '13 at 20:13
  • 2
    @FumbleFingers Agreed. Hostess is a pigeonhole. – Bradd Szonye Jul 26 '13 at 23:20
2

-- original answer rewritten and qualified --

Host is originally from the Old French hoste which included both masculine and feminine in the general sense. Its female form, hostesse, was limited to social contexts. Modern American English mostly follows suit (host, hostess).

In short - host is gender neutral. But.

While host is technically neutral it does have a masculine implication in contexts where hostess is appropriate and is used, as in "host and hostess."

To qualify my original point, in contexts where hostess is appropriate the existence and common usage of the word hostess would suggest to your audience that when you use the word host you are referring to a male.

For completeness, I should point out that hostess is still clearly used in social settings. Googling good hostess (with filters to eliminate the baked goods Hostess and the hospitality industry) will return 20,700,000 results.

GetzelR
  • 3,536
  • -1 I strongly disagree with this answer as a general statement, for the reasons given in my own answer, although it is possible that the view given in this answer is common or appropriate in GetzelR's culture. – TrevorD Jul 26 '13 at 17:23
  • 1
    "Hen" is to "chicken" as "woman" is to "human". One is the gender specific individual, the other is the collective species or race. A male chicken is a "cock" or "rooster" – Leatherwing Jul 26 '13 at 17:25
  • Personal judgement based on subjective experience, while perhaps less authoritative than a citation, is not quite the same as opinion.

    In my experience, the word host, absent any gender-identifying clues would be assumed to refer to a male. This is not true of all contexts, such as in entertainment industry, or all countries, as TrevorD points out in his answer, but it has been my experience in social settings in the US. For what it's worth.

     – GetzelR Jul 26 '13 at 17:27
  • @TrevorD: The view my statement is based on is pragmatism. If my experience is reflective of a non-negligible percentage your audience the additional "or her" you cite from Chambers Dictionary may not prevent misunderstanding. – GetzelR Jul 26 '13 at 17:35
  • 2
    This may be regionally true, but I cannot imagine somebody referring to the hostess of a party, meeting, show, conference, etc. in the US Midwest or West Coast. Hostess is increasingly used only in specific contexts, many of them offensive. At the least, you should indicate where you have encountered the word in practice, or where you have encountered confusion over the terms. – Bradd Szonye Jul 26 '13 at 18:18
  • I rewrote the answer with some citations (and a correction of my original mistaken elaboration). I stand by my original answer, now explicitly qualified. There is also now a link to a Google search that should demonstrate the continued usage of hostess in social settings. – GetzelR Jul 26 '13 at 18:57
  • Getze, I upvoted this answer and I still don't understand why people cast downvotes. However it is true that the very ink with which history, and especially social history, is written is merely fluid prejudice. –  Jul 26 '13 at 19:11
  • 2
    In contexts where hostess is appropriate: Nowadays, these are very specific contexts, most of which markedly emphasize sexuality or sexist gender norms (e.g., the practice of hiring attractive, young women as restaurant greeters). The term isn't so much a parallel to host any more as it is a specific social role. Using host doesn't imply masculinity so much as avoid the sexist implications of hostess. The current version of your answer is somewhat improved, but you're still failing to distinguish between “implies masculinity” and ”avoids sexist undertones.” – Bradd Szonye Jul 26 '13 at 23:17
  • 1
    You state that "Googling good hostess ... return[s] 20,700,000 results". When I 'Googled' it, a number of those results were references to "restaurant hostesses", companions for males, etc., so any counts are spurious. No-one is arguing that the term is not used - and the dictionary definition I provided clearly shows that it is. The original question was Is there anything preventing a female from being host ...? - and I think that you and I actually now agree that the answer to that is "No, there isn't." And I did start my answer by saying that the issue may be culture dependent. – TrevorD Jul 26 '13 at 23:38
  • There's a similarity between the debate over the use of the term host rather than hostess, with the increasing prevalence of the term actor, over actress, that appears to be part of a cultural shift away from gender specific words, in line with notions of gender equality. – user48193 Jul 27 '13 at 00:30
  • @TrevorD: Number of results is always going to be a shaky proof, I agree. I put in filters and 90% of the first 50 results used the term as a feminine version of host - referring to a woman hosting guests at her home, party and in some cases bridal showers. We agree that there is nothing definitionally preventing a host from being a woman. My point is that in social contexts there is still room for confusion and if your goal is clear communication vs scoring points for gender equality, you may want to use hostess. – GetzelR Jul 28 '13 at 14:33
  • @BraddSzonye: As I pointed out to Trevor, the Google search for "good hostess" (with filters) returned results of which 90% of the first 50 results used the term as a feminine version of host - referring to a woman hosting guests at her home, party and in some cases bridal showers. No sexist or sexual emphasis. As Trevor points out this may be true in the US and not in the UK. I stand by the implied masculinity - in a context where you would or could use hostess for a woman the audience may assume that by host you mean a man and clarity would suggest you use hostess. – GetzelR Jul 28 '13 at 14:42
  • On the contrary, I would say that paying someone a compliment is one of the specific contexts where people will fall back on traditional, sexist language. More importantly, you haven't shown that this actually creates confusion in gender-neutral contexts, which is why your claim bothers me. – Bradd Szonye Jul 28 '13 at 16:56
  • 1
    For example, if you heard somebody say of a bridal shower, “Chris was such a good host!” – would you ever seriously wonder, “That's unusual, a man hosting a bridal shower”? – Bradd Szonye Jul 28 '13 at 17:08
  • That's a great example, because Chris is also used for both genders. I don't know much about bridal showers and as I read the first part of your comment I did assume Chris was a man - but that's my ignorance. Accepting that it is unheard of for men to host bridal showers that would qualify as a context for which host can only mean one thing, and so - no confusion. Change the context to a party and I think many people would assume Chris is a man. Do you want to be correct and misunderstood or correct and understood? When hostess can be used, host can be misunderstood. Why complicate things? – GetzelR Jul 28 '13 at 17:27
-1

I would probably use hostess only in the joking, but complimentary phrase the hostess-with-the-most-est.

ntres
  • 1