RE: Benevolent Sexism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

dcnovice -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 10:25:20 AM)

quote:

bounty 44:
but id say we don't even need (for sake of my point) to go as far as considering boats to be "she", or cars, or guns, etc. what I am thinking/wondering about is evident at the simple generic use of the pronoun "he."

About a decade ago, I heard that Lloyds of London had started to refer to ships as "it" rather than "she." I normally don't feel a deep need to assign gender to things, but the news made me sad. Immediately, I thought of the most beautiful paragraph I'd ever read:

SHE WAS THE largest moving object that mankind had ever built. She was the first liner to cross the Atlantic at better than 30 knots, the first to exceed 1,000 feet in length, the first truly modern ship. She coddled her passengers with a spaciousness, luxury, and cuisine that has never been equaled. She was the Normandie, France’s pride and America’s joy. She lived a life of glory and acclaim. And she died horribly, at the hands of strangers.

http://www.americanheritage.com/content/ship-died-carelessness?page=show

Changing "she" to "it" would bleed all the life out of sentences I'd remembered for years, and I doubt the altered lede would have drawn me into the story the same way, much less instilled an abiding love for the ship.



bounty44 -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 10:48:13 AM)

i absolutely agree with that...

from my perspective, there is something very romantic, if not downright poetic and noble about ships being "she" and I suspect much can be said for other things we used gendered descriptions for too.



PeonForHer -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 11:07:47 AM)

quote:

i absolutely agree with that...

from my perspective, there is something very romantic, if not downright poetic and noble about ships being "she" and I suspect much can be said for other things we used gendered descriptions for too.


I'm not quite sure the feminine gender works for me regarding vessels like destroyers, battleships and aircraft carriers, though.



Aylee -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 11:35:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Perhaps they have a point, even if it is expressed a little haplessly.

In English we attribute gender to a cornucopia of things that are naturally genderless. For example countries, cars, colours, materials, even pipe fittings. I could go on but the list would be endless. And other languages (eg French Italian) are even worse offenders than English in this respect.

The odd thing is not that someone advertises genderless gingerbread but that someone attributed an exclusively masculine gender to gingerbread in the first place. Even stranger is the fact that we gender so many neutral things promiscuously and assume/insist that it is natural and accurate to do so, inspite of it being so obviously and self evidently not so.




This may be the correct link: http://pointlesslygenderedproducts.tumblr.com/


I do not think that gingerbread per se is ascribed a gender. Gingerbread cookie cut outs are ascribed a gender. There is a song/story about it. Gingerbread houses/tress/and so forth have no gender.

If you look at the link I posted, gender seems mostly handed out by color. Which is annoying. But here is a true story:

Several years ago a young man was bullied for wearing a pink shirt. I do not recall which country. There is NOW a Pink-Shirt Day Anti-Bullying campaign because of this.

I only know about this because the children brought home notes from school about it and I looked it up. And yes, they participated. I even sent the money in so that they could get the bracelets.

But yeah. . . we live in a world that pink = girl SO much that someone wearing one can create an issue that leads to a special day about it. [8|]

One more story about needless gendering:

When my daughter was a few weeks old I had her dressed in an adorable little sailor outfit (white with blue trim). SOOOO cute! I actually had a women tell me that I should not have her in that, I should have her in pink so that people would know she was a girl. [8|] My response was mostly diplomatic.



mnottertail -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 11:38:27 AM)

But you are sort of sneaking up on my point, Aylee. I wonder what say English speaking peoples would do and describe in the German/Spanish test, because we do the 'benevolent sexism' in other ways, so would we show up all confused with the tests or show ourselves leaning German or Spanish in sexist thought.

I mean I think of a lock as female, and a key as male in terms of its operation, but a key is a fuckin key otherwise.

So, yanno? If I hadnt been on this thread and we did word association or whatnot, I still think you say bridge, I would say brigit, because a common nickname, but wouldnt involve myself with the gender of the deal.



PeonForHer -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 11:42:32 AM)

quote:

But yeah. . . we live in a world that pink = girl SO much that someone wearing one can create an issue that leads to a special day about it.


In the UK there was a fashion, some ten years ago, for men to wear pink tee shirts. Perhaps surprisingly, some of the most sexist men I knew at the time went for that fashion. I didn't - nup, pink was *not* for me. It was as far as I could go just to wear bright colours (red, yellow, orange, purple - but not, ever, pink). I might pride myself on my non-sexist attitude, but I'm still a stuffed up Brit. ;-)

Funny. Apparently, the gender association isn't even that old: it only goes back a hundred years.

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/when-did-girls-start-wearing-pink-1370097/?no-ist



bounty44 -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 12:17:25 PM)

i suspect in the case of the navy, the sense of love and pride that would engender (no pun intended) the use of female gendered references to ships, would be intimately tied with actually serving on them.

I wonder too---if the when the sailors call their ships "she" they are mindful of the women they have left behind, to protect. the conjoining of the two makes sense.



mnottertail -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 12:19:14 PM)

If they was in pink, they would be swung from the highest yardarm in the British navy, Davy.



tj444 -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 12:57:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

When my daughter was a few weeks old I had her dressed in an adorable little sailor outfit (white with blue trim). SOOOO cute! I actually had a women tell me that I should not have her in that, I should have her in pink so that people would know she was a girl. [8|] My response was mostly diplomatic.


I wonder how some little baby girls become girly girls and others become tomboys.. is it the parents influence? is it born in them? is it siblings (such as 1 girl with 4 brothers= tomboy?)? of course with tv, etc there is all the sterotypical advertising/brainwashing.. I grew up on a farm so I was used to getting dirty & doing untypical things.. as a little girl I hated wearing dresses and still do, for the most part.. absolutely hate pantyhose, what a horrible invention.. [:'(]



Aylee -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:11:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

i absolutely agree with that...

from my perspective, there is something very romantic, if not downright poetic and noble about ships being "she" and I suspect much can be said for other things we used gendered descriptions for too.


I'm not quite sure the feminine gender works for me regarding vessels like destroyers, battleships and aircraft carriers, though.


Umm. . . but what if the ship HAS a girl's name?

The USS Hopper, comes to mind. A guided missile destroyer. (Named for Adm Grace Hopper.)



Aylee -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:23:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

But you are sort of sneaking up on my point, Aylee. I wonder what say English speaking peoples would do and describe in the German/Spanish test, because we do the 'benevolent sexism' in other ways, so would we show up all confused with the tests or show ourselves leaning German or Spanish in sexist thought.

I mean I think of a lock as female, and a key as male in terms of its operation, but a key is a fuckin key otherwise.

So, yanno? If I hadnt been on this thread and we did word association or whatnot, I still think you say bridge, I would say brigit, because a common nickname, but wouldnt involve myself with the gender of the deal.


I think that we would react and answer based on seeing the "male" or "female" term, not necessarily the object. Unless, of course, there was a reason we had seen the item anthropomorphized at some point and it stuck with us.



mnottertail -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:26:11 PM)

Ja, I think I feel the same, though am unsure that I feel anything . I often speak of the male and female parts of plug ins, and of pump hoses, and many other articles,that fit this way and that together, but have never desired a blowjob from them.

Never entered my mind until you possessed me of that earworm.



mnottertail -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:28:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Unless, of course, there was a reason we had seen the item anthropomorphized at some point and it stuck with us.



And isn't that the whole fuck-o-ree and definition of fetish?




Aylee -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:36:33 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

When my daughter was a few weeks old I had her dressed in an adorable little sailor outfit (white with blue trim). SOOOO cute! I actually had a women tell me that I should not have her in that, I should have her in pink so that people would know she was a girl. [8|] My response was mostly diplomatic.


I wonder how some little baby girls become girly girls and others become tomboys.. is it the parents influence? is it born in them? is it siblings (such as 1 girl with 4 brothers= tomboy?)? of course with tv, etc there is all the sterotypical advertising/brainwashing.. I grew up on a farm so I was used to getting dirty & doing untypical things.. as a little girl I hated wearing dresses and still do, for the most part.. absolutely hate pantyhose, what a horrible invention.. [:'(]


Ya know. . . I have no idea. Mine likes nothing better than a "fancy dress," a tiara, and to go outside and play. This is the big reason I purchase second-hand dresses for her. She likes to ride horses, swim, AND do the Bella Dancerella dance lesson videos. She likes taking care of her "babies" AND play sword fighting.

I think that once children show a "like" towards some toy or activity, parents and relatives may tend to go overboard and purchase all gifts and such under that theme.

Oh. . . and by the by. . . we recently had to replace her baby-doll. Her bother got a baby-doll at the same. She got her first porcelain one and because I think he is too young for that, he actually got a snow man baby doll to love. So. . . yeah. . both of the children hit both genders of toys and activities. (To add to this, my companion, who is male, bought him the doll.)



Aylee -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:39:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Unless, of course, there was a reason we had seen the item anthropomorphized at some point and it stuck with us.



And isn't that the whole fuck-o-ree and definition of fetish?




No. Because it happens all the time in literature and speaking and such. Think about seeing the "man in the moon," or old woman faces in mountain rocks, or poetry. We give human characteristics to stuff all the time. "Stupid computer," comes to mind.



mnottertail -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:41:35 PM)

Well, yeah............but no boy puts on lace short bobs to go out with the boys drinkin and chasin 'tang.......



DesFIP -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:48:50 PM)

Re pink being for girls only, one of the most aggressively masculine sports about is rodeo. Some years ago, someone thought up the Tough Enough to Wear pink campaign. The money raised goes toward breast cancer research but even with most of the men in the circuit participating, I've known some men to flatly refuse. They had nothing to prove, there would have been no comments from anyone, yet they still couldn't get past the hangup.



mnottertail -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 1:54:54 PM)

Wow. I dunno. That is just flakier than a box of post toasties.



MercTech -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 2:45:21 PM)

Sigh, another childhood tale sacrificed to the gods of political correctness...

First they purged the tale of an Indian boy's conflict with a tiger (Little Black Sambo) because some might construe it as being derogatory to African Americans. (Gad it was even about a different continent) and now you aren't supposed to tell the tale of the Gingerbread Man.

Link to "Little Black Sambo"
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1330/1330-h/1330-h.htm

Link to "The Gingerbread Man"
http://www.nursery-rhymes.co/index.php/home/lyrics/the-gingerbread-man



mnottertail -> RE: Benevolent Sexism (3/16/2015 2:48:54 PM)

But you were ok with them removing Tar Babies, at the very least, no?



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875