English idiom help

[Brother Oni]

Could someone help me with a colloquial english phrase please?

I was under the impression that 'red blooded male' meant a particularly virile heterosexual man, but I was berated on this site for using it (somebody wrote a surrealist/sarcastic post involving homosexuals having yellow blood) and recently again.

Google finds the phrase meaning "vigorous, manly, lusty, virile, strong, vital, robust and hearty" but no indication of sexual orientation.

Am I mistaken in my understanding of the phrase?

[thubby]

the only other use I've ever heard for red-blooded is for average joe. (because blue blooded means nobility)

[Hazkali]

I think some people do use it to mean heterosexuals only, but I would be wary of using it in that sense as "red-blooded man" has connotations of superiority over whoever is identified as not being "red-blooded". Most of the time I see it used in an non-ironic sense it has a whiff of "no true Scotsman"- that is, "you cannot be a red-blooded man unless you drink beer", or "you cannot be a red-blooded man if you're a vegetarian".

Therefore unless you're aiming to imply that all homosexual men are effete (what I take as the opposite to "red-blooded") then I wouldn't use "red-blooded male" to refer only to heterosexuals.

[kamikasei]

The phrase is commonly used to ascribe some stereotypical masculine behaviour to all "red-blooded males". The implication is that if you don't exhibit that behaviour, you're not really a red-blooded male. I'd guess that's where you're encountering a problem.

In what context have you used the phrase? Is it really surprising that, say, a gay man being told that "any red-blooded male" would want to sleep with Female Sex Symbol Q-7 might find the suggestion that he apparently either isn't male or has some other colour of blood to be a bit annoying?

[Grimlock]

I would agree with what most people have already said. I take it to mean lusty, bawdy, virile etc etc, but not exclusively hetro!

[Knaight]

In short, it is a term meaning one who connects to the traditional western male values, post Renaissance. Physically fit, extremely courageous, and not particularly cerebral. Its that last part that some of the people here, including myself, are not particularly fond of.

On the matter of heterosexuality. A while back the term was used along with a picture advertised as a hot chick, someone said something to the effect of "any red blooded male would hit that", and that brought out the sarcastic yellow blood response. That particular post brought out the connotation mentioned in the opening post of this paragraph.

[BisectedBrioche]

Yeah, it basically means someone who may also be described as a "real man" (often used in jest). Saying a homosexual isn't one is basically a "gays are effeminate" joke. Acceptable in times gone by, but much less so in the present.

[kamikasei]

On the matter of heterosexuality. A while back the term was used along with a picture advertised as a hot chick, someone said something to the effect of "any red blooded male would hit that", and that brought out the sarcastic yellow blood response.

I'd also point out that this usage is common enough that even if you're not talking about who anyone wants to sleep with when you use the phrase, you may still be bringing up this association for your listeners.

[Brother Oni]

I was originally using the phrase to indicate appreciation of a woman’s cleavage, something I thought by definition a homosexual male would not appreciate in a similar fashion to a heterosexual male.

Since I thought the phrase included heterosexual in its meaning, I didn’t really understand why there was a misunderstanding, like roleplayers are more understanding of geekish behaviour, since most roleplayers are geeks in the first place.

I certainly didn’t mean to imply that non-red blooded males were somehow inferior to red blooded males, or that being lusty and virile were exclusively heterosexual traits. I just thought that ‘red blooded male’ was a shorter way of saying ‘vigorous, manly, lusty, virile, strong, vital, robust, hearty and heterosexual male’.

Thank you all for clearing up the confusion. I’ll make note of it in the future.

[kamikasei]

I just thought that ‘red blooded male’ was a shorter way of saying ‘vigorous, manly, lusty, virile, strong, vital, robust, hearty and heterosexual male’.

It pretty much is, and that's exactly the problem.

[Brother Oni]

It pretty much is, and that's exactly the problem.

Now I’m confused again.

Is it that the phrase implies that homosexuals are excluded from the list of positive traits? Or that the negative connotation of low intelligence is offensive to heterosexuals?

If the phrase is intended to refer to a group which has a specific preference, why would a different group with a different preference get offended at its use?

It’d be like Everton supporters getting offended at Liverpool supporters being called ‘the reds’.*

*Trying to come up with a non-political, non-racial example is tough. For people not familiar with English football**, Liverpool and Everton are two rival teams based in the same city – Liverpool colours are mainly red, Everton colours are mainly blue.

**Soccer for Americans and Japanese

Edit: Fixed example

[kamikasei]

Being "red blooded" is not a neutral trait. It implies that those who don't match the image are either a) unhealthy or b) not human.

[Brother Oni]

Ah, so the phrase itself has social connotations that are offensive, rather than the phrase itself being offensive?

Like the literal chinese term 'ghost people' generally meaning 'westener' with negative connotations and being derogatory to white people specifically.

[Ranna]

have to say I giggled at this thread, not because of the subject itself but that people took offense to your use of the term.. people get so mad these days hehehehe

[kamikasei]

Ah, so the phrase itself has social connotations that are offensive, rather than the phrase itself being offensive?

I'm not sure what you mean.

If you say that X is what red-blooded Y do, then you're saying any Y who don't do X have non-red blood. That's probably a fairly insulting implication, though it may not be anywhere near the speaker's mind.

If anything I'd say the social connotations of the phrase, as simply a figure of speech, make it less offensive because you can presume the one using it hasn't carefully thought through all the ways it could be taken.

[Hazkali]

The problem is that there is no accepted list of defining characteristics of being a "red-blooded male", and whether "red blooded" is being used to describe a neutral subset of males, or a superior one.

For the definition, I think that most people will agree (in its non-literal sense) that a metrosexual/camp man, regardless of sexuality, is not "red blooded". However, we no longer live in a society where effeteness is accepted as the defining characteristic of homosexual men. So if all of the traditional red-blooded characteristics are transposed onto a homosexual man, the question is whether or not the homosexuality necessarily negates them.

The problem is compounded by the fact that "red blooded" is more often than not used to mean a superior set of people, analogously to "real men". Again, in the past effeteness and homosexuality were commonly accepted as making a person "less of a man", which is unacceptable (at least in these parts) now.

[Brother Oni]

I'm not sure what you mean.

If you say that X is what red-blooded Y do, then you're saying any Y who don't do X have non-red blood. That's probably a fairly insulting implication, though it may not be anywhere near the speaker's mind.

I think it's that I regard the phrase as a neutral one, when it has other connotations to it.
It's much like I think of Confucianism as a legal and ethical system, while it's mostly regarded as a religion.

The phrase also isn't a literal one, it's a figurative one. Some people interpret it as literal, hence the yellow blood version.


The problem is that there is no accepted list of defining characteristics of being a "red-blooded male", and whether "red blooded" is being used to describe a neutral subset of males, or a superior one.

I agree that this is the case. I'm just wondering is there any way of using the phrase without annoying somebody? :smallsigh:

[Totally Guy]

I agree that this is the case. I'm just wondering is there any way of using the phrase without annoying somebody? :smallsigh:

Dude, I'm a well spoken Southerner living in Yorkshire. I get hate sometimes just by opening my mouth and sounding like I don't belong.

[Brother Oni]

It could be worse - you could be an ethnic minority like me and get hate for just walking down the street.

Here's hoping we don't derail the thread with a "how my life is worse" contest... :smalltongue:

[Zevox]

The phrase is commonly used to ascribe some stereotypical masculine behaviour to all "red-blooded males". The implication is that if you don't exhibit that behaviour, you're not really a red-blooded male.
To my understanding, basically this. Though to understand why it may cause such negative reactions it should perhaps be made explicit that the implication there is that not being "red-blooded" would be taken to mean you're very abnormal in a negative sense; even not quite really human, since of course all humans have red blood.

Really, it's a ridiculous phrase that I personally never use, right up there "real men."

Zevox

[Totally Guy]

It could be worse - you could be an ethnic minority like me and get hate for just walking down the street.

Here's hoping we don't derail the thread with a "how my life is worse" contest... :smalltongue:

Please, no! The Four Yorkshiremen sketch is my secret weakness. However did you discover that?

[Lady Tialait]

Being "red blooded" is not a neutral trait. It implies that those who don't match the image are either a) unhealthy or b) not human.

Being 'Blue Blooded' could be considered an insult, or a compliment.

It's hard not to offend when talking about....anything. I personally live my life in a super offensive way. Everyone knows I don't go around throwing hate but I don't like thinking I am not being offensive just to get remanded.

Bah, rant.

[Brother Oni]

Please, no! The Four Yorkshiremen sketch is my secret weakness. However did you discover that?

I'm an obsessive stalker and you've attracted my attention. I've been watching you for weeks, learning your habits and mannerisms, rooting through your rubbish, so I can steal your identity and now I have the final piece of the puzzle that the Monty Python Four Yorkshiremen sketch is your secret weakness! My copying of you is complete! Mwahahahahahah!!!!

Actually, it was a fluke. :smallbiggrin:

[bibliophile]

I'm not sure what you mean.

If you say that X is what red-blooded Y do, then you're saying any Y who don't do X have non-red blood. That's probably a fairly insulting implication, though it may not be anywhere near the speaker's mind.

If anything I'd say the social connotations of the phrase, as simply a figure of speech, make it less offensive because you can presume the one using it hasn't carefully thought through all the ways it could be taken.

With all due respect, I think this is ridiculous. Is calling someone who's easily enraged "fiery" insulting because it implies they're a pyromaniac or fire elemental?


In regards to the meaning of "red-blooded", in response to above I've never heard it used to mean non-cerebral.

[Brother Oni]

In regards to the meaning of "red-blooded", in response to above I've never heard it used to mean non-cerebral.

I've heard it used in reference to Tim Allen's character from Home Improvement.
Tim Taylor's not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed. :smalltongue:

I suspect the non-cerebral aspect comes from the libido part of red-blooded, in that you're easily distracted by a nice pair of legs/chest and a pretty smile.

[bibliophile]

I suspect the non-cerebral aspect comes from the libido part of red-blooded, in that you're easily distracted by a nice pair of legs/chest and a pretty smile.


Well, I am. But that doesn't mean I'm an idiot. Even Einstein got married.

[Tirian]

I've heard it used in reference to Tim Allen's character from Home Improvement.
Tim Taylor's not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed. :smalltongue:

I suspect the non-cerebral aspect comes from the libido part of red-blooded, in that you're easily distracted by a nice pair of legs/chest and a pretty smile.

It's not just libido. A red-blooded male will start a bar fight if someone insults his mother or his baseball team or the company that made his pick-up truck or whatever. It's not that they're particularly stupid, it's that they have clear buttons and you can't expect him to remain rational when those buttons are pressed.

And just to be clear, very few gay men would self-identify as red-blooded, and to the degree that there is a red-blooded community they would not be particularly welcoming of an openly gay man. This isn't totally about homophobia (although that may well be a factor) but rather that the stereotype about gay men is that they are well-educated and culturally and socially elite and therefore less likely to be imprinted with the social conditioning that one associates with red-blooded men.

[ForzaFiori]

The problem many people take with the phrase "red-blooded man" is that it has come to mean essentially the same thing as "real man". So saying that "any red-blooded man would want to sleep with [attractive woman]" has become akin to saying that if you don't want to sleep with her, your not a "real man". Men who don't fall into the normal category of a "red-blooded man" tend to take offense at this because it insinuates that they're effeminate, which is typically a very big insult to a male.

[Areswargod139]

I think we're getting a bit too analytical with this one. "Red-Blooded" just means vaguely masculine. Is it patriarchal, misogynist, and maybe even a little homophobic? Probably. But since its a vague expression with no definite connotation it can't be definitively pegged as such.

My two cents.:smallcool:

[Rutskarn]

Red-blooded male means, "a manly social-realism-esque ideal of a square-jawed man." Whether or not this includes homosexuals depends very much on who you're talking to.