So our society for the longest time has had the tendency to assume the male voice or audience. With this in mind, why is it most architectural feats like great ships, cities, or countries were always feminized: refereed to with "she." Was it simply because these things were objects likened to how women were preceived or something else?
Pic not really related.
So our society for the longest time has had the tendency to assume the male voice or audience. With this in mind...
Because they are possessions, just like women
Its also not universal, in some languages things will be gendered male or female instead of primarily female
country --> land --> earth. Earth is usually imagined as feminime, see Gaia and other earth godesses.
God you're such a beta faggot.
what? This is a thread for discussion. If you have nothing to contribute other than name calling then leave.
>in some labguages, things will be genderes male or female
That's interesting, are to give exampes?
Also, if that's the case in other cultures, why is it people like to assume it was due to women being objectified then? if other cultures, which I'm assuming are patriarchal(since most are)or at the very least don't tend to objectify men, sometimes use male pronouns then perhaps there was more to it?
>So our society for the longest time has had the tendency to assume the male voice or audience.
Jesus fucking Christ, this sentence.
>why is it most architectural feats like great ships, cities, or countries were always feminized: refereed to with "she."
Because they either possessed the traits of women (think temperamental and the sea), or were thought fondly of by men or both.
gendered* languages *
are you going to give examples*
damn my phone is killing me.
>this sentence
You got a problem with my grammar or something? No need to be a grammar Nazi. If you disagree with the statement that sounds like personal problem.
Oh, so objectifcation then. I thought so but user makes an interesting point of this not being the case in languages across all cultures though, so I'm curious if there was more to it.
It's not about the grammar, it's about you sounding like a literal tumblr faggot, and then making us read it and hear it in your gay voice.
>You got a problem with my grammar or something?
More the implied victim hood.
Pretty sure I just fell for bait, I feel bad for myself.
>So our society for the longest time has had the tendency to assume the male voice or audience
so Sex and the City assumed a male audience? and 50 Shades of Gray?
>le tumblr meme
why not actually point out what's so bad about what he said?
I said "had" did I not?
Also desu, a large number of works are still mostly written by men and we still struggle to this day to have an abundance of down-to earth-female characters that everyone can relate to like males.
50 shades of Grey is still pretty bad imo in its representation of sex for all females and even men into bdsm.
I digress though. Back to the OP.
>he
OP did not tell us his preferred pronouns, how dare you assume xe identifies as male you shitlord.
What implied victimhood? You even admitted that it's because women were seen ad possisions by men thats why these objects were referred to as she. And that these sayings caught on for the longest time kind of supports my implication of sexism does it not? Anway, I'm still waiting for user to give me those examples to help prove otherwise.
If women weren't such shit at writing there would be more relatable female characters
This. So insensitive. I'm crying in anger right now. Humanity has not evolved, like... At all!
>sobs
I'm sorry... I gotta go now.
But most of the unrelatedable female characters come from male writers because they suck at writing them. You just kind of shot your own argument down.
most writers are male AND are just unaware(or don't give a shit in some cases)
We're off the main idea of the thread now though.
The best most relatable female characters were written by men, eg Lt Ripley from alien
That's funny, I don't remember when I said all men. But, luckily as time goes on men are getting less lazy even if it means doing research. There are good male characters written by women too and female characters of course. All it takes is effort, which admittedly most people don't care to do.
Sometimes they just really suck at writing like most fantasy writers.
> inb4 twilight and hunger games.
Yeah no. That was just shit writing
true, like mother nature. Are you extending that to all objects made from materials found in nature?
But women don't write good female characters, almost all of them were written by men
Sure, Harry Potter had shit male and female characters no one related to.
>muh serious children's literature
Kek
>With this in mind, why is it most architectural feats like great ships, cities, or countries were always
You ride a ship
You reside INSIDE of cities and countries
See where I am going with this?
>harry potter
>good at anything
?
>twilight
>hunger games
>harry potter
Pleb spotted
I was simply giving examples of fantasy or fiction that most people relate to regardless of gender. The same can be said of Avatar (yes made by guys), I can't think of many other things written by men that are diverse in perspective right now actually.
Yeah basically objectification then. But I was wondering about examples to the contrary in different languages/cultures that,was brought up.
Oh shut the fuck up already.
>muh objectification
Women truly are the niggers of gender
He's only baiting, I fell for it too. Stop replying.
What? Are you really trying to say, on a history forum, women were never objectified? Like really? And you tell me to shut up because I say things that disagree with your worldview(despite the facts and evidence that support it). Seriously, you fuck off. You're obviously triggered by that word for some reason.
Unlike you, I'm trying to consider other views based on what another person posted. If only he's come back.
How about you actually bring evidence of the contrary instead of just insulting people.
>protip you can't.
>people who say things backed by evidence that go against my world view trigger me so they are baiting.
Seriously, have you perhaps considered that maybe you're the one shit posting?
This board isn't /pol/ where you can just stormfag and not make an argument or post valid sources so you may want to go back.
OR better, join your triggered buddies at tumblr.
Don't reply to him, it's just /pol/ impersonating a stereotypical liberal/redditor to trigger people into getting him (you)s.
Sage hide report.
The only poltards are getting triggered by terms like objectification as if only tumblr and Reddit believe it was a thing.
You haven't even given an argument to the contrary view because of how pathetic you are. You just scream buzzwords.
I know in french things are labeled with genders nothing is really called "that" in a plain way it's more like him or her if you directly translate or they will have male or female endings.
>be inna sailing ship with 100 other dudes for months at a time
>no women around
At least the ship's a girl. This would be pretty gay otherwise.
Oh you're referring to how things like apple(la pomme) la terre (earth) are feminine sounding and things like or le chat, le poisson, le navire( cat, fish, or ship respectively) are masculine sounding so they use masculine articles?
True, but that is grammatical structure. I'm not sure if they refer to it differently in terms of figure of speech or informal language. That's a good point though.
Sounds pretty desperate but I guess. Doesn't explain why things like country or a city are referred to the same way though.
>haven't even given an argument to the contrary view
in case you're a real newfriend and not baiting, just want to let you know that most people here probably do agree with the premise that women are objectified, but are a little tired of hearing that point made over and over again.
I'm not new. I discovered this new board last year but I've been around different boards on this site for years. I just didn't think people in this Veeky Forums would be so ignorant and immature to get triggered by specific word just because they are "tired" of hearing it. It's a fact since it is backed up by much evidence so saying it or not saying it won't make it any more or less true. Anyway, the argument never stated that only women are objectified btw, just that they were disproportionately.
Women objectify themselves, you can't port the blame all on men
>Like really?
this thread has been shit from the start, you master ruseman
sage
>trying to sage
How new are you? This thread is not shit just because it uses facts you don't agree with. The only shitposters are you fags.