I'd agree its olde fashioned, but im struggling to see how it can be considered offensive at any level. Instead of simply bemoaning the terms, perhaps someone could provide an explanation that explains the mechanics behind their objection?
Almost without exception whenever a man is called something traditionally associated with women (eg big girls blouse) it is considered derogatory to that man or group of men, being spoken sbout.
Thereby implying that women and their characteristics are somehow inferior, because these phrases are used to ridicule or diminish the people being spoken about.
So we must conclude that feminine is 'less than' , or inferior in some way.
So it's a way of insulting not just the immediate target, but also females who are thus being used as agents of insult.
Of course these phrases, used by themselves, are not a massive problem when heard individually.
But when taken in the round, and constantly drip fed, as part of a whole historical and cultural language that implies 'female' is less than, or weaker, less mentally capable, less worthy of respect then they do add up to something.
Especially when used in the public realm.
Just like terms that imply racism ableism, etc.
Does that make it clearer?
