• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • getgood.com
  • Privacy & Disclosure
  • GDPR/CCPA Compliance
  • Contact

Marketing Roadmaps

Here chicky, chicky, a short vocabulary quiz

August 29, 2006 by Susan Getgood

One of the pictures below is of a chick and the other is a woman. Can you guess which one?

Flickr image by Awesome Pets

Flickr image by ACME-Nollmeyer of
Acme Photography, Phoenix, AZ

A+ if your choice for chick was yellow and fuzzy.

One of the things that irked me about the item last week on why so many women choose PR as a career was that during her interview with Sam Whitmore, Sharon Barclay, the author of the paper,  told Sam that she wanted to find out why so many "chicks" were in PR.

Now I suppose it is hip and cool to use derogatory slang about oneself or one’s group, whether it be race, class or gender, but it always sounds so false. Almost like the group is trying to show the dominant group how really cool they are by adopting, or co-opting, the negative term.  As though somehow that might make it a positive.

Doesn’t work. At least not for me.

Tags: gender, sexism, PR, public relations

Related

Filed Under: PR

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Mary Schmidt says

    August 29, 2006 at 5:04 pm

    Susan,

    I’m less concerned about women referring to themselves as “chicks” as I am by those that adopt “proud slut” personas (And you know the PR blogs to which I’m referring – if indeed they’re written by women.)

    I also think part of the issue is one of age. Those of us who remember when the want ads were segregated by gender (and women were fired for getting married) have a different perspective than the “fluffy young ones”

    And, as evidenced by a recent Tom Peters post (where I got whacked by another commenter for apparently defending men) there’s a whole lotta room for interpretation of both actions and words.

    (Of course, that stupid Forbes article was just that – stupid. Not to mention enraging.)

  2. Susan Getgood says

    August 29, 2006 at 5:34 pm

    I suppose my reaction to the “chick” in this context was in part due to the conclusion of the study that women are better liars which is why they go into PR. I’m less likely to go off the rails if someone refers to a book as chick-lit or a film as a chick-flic. Still not crazy about it though.

    I feel the same way about the n-word (and that one I won’t even write). Just because a woman uses the word “chick” or a person of color uses the n-word doesn’t make the negativity go away. The person using it may want it to, may wish it so, but language holds on to its meaning tenaciously, and a word or phrase born in racism or sexism doesn’t lose its negativity just cause the victim uses it.

    At least that is my occasionally humble opinion.

  3. Jonathan Hernandez says

    August 29, 2006 at 11:45 pm

    Pardon my youthful ignorance, but is “chick” really that negative or derogatory? From where did it originate?

    I’ve always considered “chick” in the same realm as “dude” – just a “cool” substitution. I’m interested to know why female Baby Boomers (and others) might/would take offense.

  4. Sherrilynne Starkie says

    August 30, 2006 at 5:06 am

    Susan, I concur. For me it wasn’t just use of the word “chick”, but Sharon’s tone of voice when she was talking about “chicks” in PR. It really irked me.

  5. Susan Getgood says

    August 30, 2006 at 7:08 am

    Jonathan —

    Umm, because a chick is a baby bird. Using animal names to refer to people is a way to put them down. As further example, a bitch is a female canine. Not appropriate when applied to a female person. An ass is a pack animal. Not a person.

    And a chick is a baby bird.

  6. kirsten says

    August 30, 2006 at 11:22 am

    You have to forgive me for disagreeing with you, Susan. I have my MBA from Duke, but I’m proud to be a Southern blonde chick. So much so that I used to facetitiously sign my emails KCC – “Kinda Cool Chick.” I call women cool chicks all the time – and I mean it with the utmost respect. Otherwise, I’d call you a bawdy brawd. ;)-

    We proudly display a photo of partying chicks on our blog today, the #1 blog for women entrepreneurs.

    kindly,
    kirsten

  7. Mary Schmidt says

    August 30, 2006 at 12:21 pm

    Kirsten (and Susan),

    I sometimes refer to myself – with pride – as a “tough ol’ broad” and it’s the highest compliment if I give a fellow femme that title.

    I believe (with the exception of terms such as bitch or ass) that it comes down to a combination of the term, the tone AND the context.

    Further, as I noted off-blog to Susan re chicks – I don’t have nearly the problem with that term as I do with women (if, in fact, they’re women) who adopt a slut persona in their marketing and blogs. I’m sorry, but sticking your breasts in a guy’s face and talkin’ trash – no matter how “fun” or “ironic” it’s intended – or how enlightened the man is – his little brain is going to take over the thinking. Which leaves you, the breast flasher, at a distinct disadvantage.

    Yours,
    A fellow “fluffy blonde”

  8. kirsten says

    August 30, 2006 at 12:58 pm

    Hi Mary:

    You’ve got me thinkin’ What a great title for a book! “Little Brains and Breast Flashers.”

    Hmm. That may qualify me as a “bawdy brawd.” 🙂

    kindly,
    kirsten

  9. Mary Schmidt says

    August 30, 2006 at 7:06 pm

    Kirsten,

    I’d be honored to dub thee a “tough ol’ broad” (age isn’t relevant – it’s ‘tude!)

    Back in the day, I was always tempted to say, “Uh, fella, look up HERE, they’ve not grown since the last time you looked.” Silly stuff but with serious consequences. That’s what makes all this male, female, sexism stuff so difficult.

    And, Susan I fully respect your views if you don’t like “broad” as it can be demeaning in others’ context.

  10. Susan Getgood says

    August 30, 2006 at 7:13 pm

    It’s all relative my friends, and much of the issue is in the tone, as Sherrilynne points out.

    If I had one wish on this subject, it would be that people think about the language they use. If they want to use a term for effect, no problem. Just be sure you know what the effect REALLY is 🙂

    It isn’t always what we think.

  11. Mary Metcalf says

    August 31, 2006 at 9:56 pm

    My opinion is that names like these definitly do not help and are not appropriate in a business environment. Sure…call your friend something like this, but not when discussing business. Why can’t we call each other something smarter…like perhaps our names?? I agree that the context is what matters, but honestly I would prefer my name.

  12. Strive Notes says

    September 1, 2006 at 5:12 am

    September 1st: This weeks top 5

    Another week flies by; another top 5 list.  Happy Labour Day Weekend to our American and Canadian colleagues.  The rest of you, keep on striving!
    1.  Susan Getgoods Marketing Roadmaps has a good debate a about the use of derogatory slang whe…

  13. Mary's Blog says

    September 1, 2006 at 10:23 am

    Words Will Hurt Me (and You)

    They dont do the physical damage of sticks and stones but they can be demeaning, demoralizing and enraging which can lead to the throwing of those sticks and stones.

    And, the words can mean something totally different to you,…

  14. Yvonne DiVita says

    September 1, 2006 at 2:54 pm

    Love the dialogue here. I have to chime in – if Chick is bad, then…I guess ‘dickless’ is bad, too. That’s my book title, Dick*less Marketing. It was meant to roll eyes and turn heads – because the true meaning refers to our fond friends from the 50s, Dick and Jane. Meanwhile, I have no problem being called a chick. I don’t like being called a broad. For me – it’s more in WHO is doing the calling, than in what they’re saying.

    If I’m referred to as chick by friends and colleagues, I know it’s meant as a compliment (they want me to feel younger). If they call me a broad, the inference is that I’m tough, and depending on the context, that can be good, also.

    Chick, broad – woman, womyn, I think they’re all just labels. As Laurence Haughton says (you have his book in your reading list) it’s not what you say, it’s what you do.

  15. Susan Getgood says

    September 1, 2006 at 5:31 pm

    Yvonne — true enough, but of course labels define. Provided we like the definition, we won’t mind. Problem is, the definitions aren’t the same in all quarters. You may like chick in certain contexts because it implies youth. I may bristle because to me it implies “inexperienced.” That’s why I prefer using the “real” word. As in, why do so many women go into PR. Far less room for misinterpretation or upset.

    As to dick*less, nah, I don’t see it the same at all. You weren’t calling anyone names, you merely punned when describing your book — about marketing to women, a group that is both not (Dick) and without (dick). It’s okay to use the terms for effect, as long as we understand what we are doing when we do.

  16. Mary Schmidt says

    September 1, 2006 at 6:02 pm

    It is truly all relative, isn’t it? I have no problem calling myself a broad – but I’d hate it if a man did it. And, I admit – when I first ran across “Dickless” I thought, um, tasteless…and then I got it. So, there ya go.

  17. Rachel M says

    September 4, 2006 at 5:48 pm

    Slang names should never be used in the business world to describe someone. Chick may not be as bad as some of the other slang names out there but it is still demeaning to the woman who is being called chick. It is the same rule for both sides, neither side should use slang. Most PR practitioners are college educated can we not come up with better ways to describe people. I mean really these people are supposed to be professionals.

  18. kirsten says

    September 7, 2006 at 11:37 am

    Dear Rachel:

    You need a thick skin and a sense of humor in business…it helps you get through the tough times. In my opinion, the world has veered far too far to the right in terms of political correctness…

    kindly,
    kirsten

Primary Sidebar

 

“If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there.” – Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland

Recent Posts

  • Merging onto the Metaverse – the Creator Economy and Web 2.5
  • Getting ready for the paradigm shift from Web2 to Web3
  • The changing nature of influence – from Lil Miquela to Fashion Ambitionist

Speaking Engagements

An up-to-date-ish list of speaking engagements and a link to my most recent headshot.

My Book



genconnectU course: Influencer Marketing for Brands

Download the course.
Use code Susan10 for 10% off.

genconnectU course: Influencer Marketing for Influencers

Download the course.
Use code Susan10 for 10% off.
Susan Getgood
Tweets by @sgetgood

Subscribe to Posts via Email

Marketing Roadmaps posts

Categories

BlogWithIntegrity.com

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Lifestyle Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}