At this point in history there’s been a billion songs from female singers about relationships. Nearly every song revolves around that topic.

Where are the songs like:

Blue Öyster Cult - Godzilla

Blue Öyster Cult - Don’t Fear The Reaper

Led Zeppelin - Immigrant Song

The Charlie Daniels Band - The Devil Went Down to Georgia

Even great songs like Rhiannon by Fleetwood Mac though about a witch is still about a witch & unrequited love.

One reason why I like Trip Hop is because there’s some great female voices but the lyrics aren’t always themed towards relationships. I suspect though that many of those songs are written by the guys in the band.

Everything I have stated above about female singers applies to female comedians too. They primarily joke about relationship stuff. There are no female Mitch Hedbergs joking about silly shit.

I just want to hear Shakira or Jewel or Norah Jones sing a song about mudwrestling Satan in a dive bar in 1970s Louisiana. Ladies, where is your imagination?

  • Deceptichum@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Women singers legit sounds like cave people speak as in “grug go hunt”. It’s so grammatically jarring.

    Women of London - Normal
    Female of London - Ferengi/Incel

    Women Journalist- Caveperson
    Female Journalist - Normal

    Men of London - Normal
    Male of London - Weird

    Men Journalist- Caveperson
    Male Journalist - Normal

    Etc. I don’t know where this grammatical shift came from, but its only really popped up in the last 5 or so years and feels chiefly American.

    • SatanicNotMessianic
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      For future reference:

      Male/female is chiefly used to refer to biological contexts. “Female spiders in some species tend to devour their male mates” is a perfectly acceptable description.

      Men/women is chiefly used to refer to human-centric sociological contexts. “Women in technology roles face hurdles that men in similar roles do not.” is also a perfectly reasonable description.

      • Deceptichum@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        And male scientists and women in science or vice versa are also completely valid.

        The word female/male has never been reserved only for the realm of biological context.

        It’s also always been used to talk about human-centric sociological contexts, such as the examples I’ve already shown.

          • Deceptichum@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            I cant see any other reply? Also this threads no longer showing on the original instance, so I think there’s some desynchronisation going on here. Maybe mods removed it the whole thread.

      • ikanreed@mastodon.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        @SatanicNotMessianic @Deceptichum I think that’s somewhat fair, but linguistically “female” is an adjective and “women” is a noun. The noun in that sentence is “singer” and female is a classifying adjective.

        The original post IS stupid and has sexist overtones, but I don’t think they come from word choice.

        • SatanicNotMessianic
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          I think I’m going to have to disagree on the basis of such usages as “women singers/songwriters.”

          The differentiation is socio-linguistic, because “female” is often used in a dehumanizing context in English. Sociology-linguistically, it’s similar to referring to “blacks” as opposed to “black Americans” or “deafs” as opposed to “deaf people.” The problem is specifically substituting a noun that historically been used to dehumanize the people to which it refers, because it is exclusionary of the “default” status (male, white, hearing).

          I am on the side of the linguists who take a descriptive rather than a prescriptive approach to the analysis of language, but part of being a descriptivist is recognizing the subtext potentially if subconsciously involved.