First off, I think you are consistently misunderstanding me when I use the term "chick". I believe your assumption is that I use that term in a negative way so that I can lash out at the female populace in general (or at least the female populace aged 15-25) to satisfy my misogynist tendencies. This is not the case.

Let me restate my dilemma: When trying to find a generic term for women aged 15-25, I draw a blank. With men, it is not a problem. "Men" or "Guys" are both acceptable terms in our society (note that "boys" is hardly ever used) But what are the equivalents for women?

"Girls" is demeaning (more on that later), "ladies" is excessively formal, "women" does the job, but does not fully describe the meaning I am trying to convey (i.e.: what KIND of women? Old women? Young women? ), "Young Women" also works but is awkward to use (i.e.: "Hey! Lets go cruising for some young women!" or "Jim was just entertaining his young woman").

So what, exactly is wrong about using "chick"? What is demeaning about it? I would imagine that if I were one to be offended by such a term, I would think of some male chauvinistic slob with a beer can saying that all women are stupid whenever the term "Chick" is used. May I assume that this is the same image that pops into the minds of people that object to the word "Chicks"? Good. Because I have an interesting observation on it: The focus of the term is on how it is used and expressed, not on what it actually means.

If I used the word "chicks" in a context in which I clearly meant that I was judging a woman or all women solely by their looks or were talking down my nose at their intelligence, I would probably deserve any flak I got from that. The problem is that I'm not. I use it simply as a term to convey the concept of a young woman/women aged 15-25.

Do you see? "Dork" and "Chick" are both slang terms with very subjective meanings. It could mean one thing for one person and another for the next. The only real way to decipher what is being conveyed by these types of terms is to examine the context in which they are in.

So say you use the term "Male Chauvinist Pigs" to refer to all men. While the term "Male Chauvinist" has more negative connotations built right into it by its very nature, if I knew that you were applying it in a positive sense to me or the male population in general, I would not be offended and certainly would not have any reason to be. After all, I remember my days in high school very well, where some of my friends and myself routinely called each other "Moron", "Stupid", "Idiot" and some slightly stronger epithets. Some outside observers thought that it was bizarre that we were all friends when we used such harsh language, but they did not understand the context in which these words were being used. Did we really think that each one of us was stupid? Of course not, these were simply greetings (i.e.: "Hey there stupid!"), etc. used affectionately to establish camaraderie and nothing more.

So even words with built-in negative connotations can be used for other purposes. It all depends on the context and the way in which they are used.

With that in mind, I'd like to compare the most popular method of describing chicks: "Girls". When referring to men of the same age, either "Guys" or "Men" is used, never "boys". Shouldn't this set up warning bells?

It is my opinion that "Girls" is a much more concrete word that is used to demean women. While "Chicks" is a more abstract term that describes a certain type of woman, "Girls", when applied to women of this age group, is specifically used to demean. After all, what are some of the characteristics of girls? Immaturity and naetivity spring to mind. I'm sure you can think of more. Those characteristics are perfectly fine and normal when referring actual girls (aged 0-15 or so), but not when applied to a slightly older age group. This is the reason why I avoid the use of the term "Girls" when referring to young women aged 15 to 25 whenever possible. Certainly "Girls" could be and is used in a positive sense all of the time, but it is my wish to avoid this issue altogether and to go with a more conceptual term. While "chicks" may be interpreted as a chauvinistic guesture, the alternative is, in my opinion, clearly worse, which illustrates a second prong of my dilemma.

Obviously I don't want to be excessively formal or awkward when referring to young women aged 15 to 25, so I must find an informal blanket term. What are the alternatives? "Girl" and "Chick" seem to be the major contenders. Both are considered offensive by different groups of women. And both are considered perfectly acceptable by others (yes, I know for a fact that some chicks PREFER to be referred to as chicks). What to do? Well, given that I'll offend some people no matter what path is taken, and given that I feel that the term "girl" has too many built-in negative connotations(as opposed to chick, which is much more ambiguous) what do you think is the logical course?

Of course, there are more alternatives. "Gal" is one. The only problem with it is that it is certainly not in common use. While I could switch to that term, I am having a hard time finding a compelling reason to do so. "Chick" conveys my meaning quite well whereas "Gal" seems to add one more layer of abstraction and confuses my meaning (most everyone would agree that "Chick" universally conveys youthfulness yet not childishness while "Gal" does not convey any age concept at all). The only reason I'd move to the term would be to avoid offense on the part of the people I talk to. Unfortunately, it is impossible to avoid offending everyone.

Thusly, it would seem that following my conscience would be best, and after rationally weighing the evidence and arguments in favor of the use of the term "chick", I must say that it seems to be the best course of action. Certainly I am open to suggestions. If a "perfect" term could be found, I would use it. But until then, it would seem that I must use the best alternative: "Chick".