PugJesus@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 2 months agoCongratulations on Brooklyn's rulelemmy.worldimagemessage-square15fedilinkarrow-up1445arrow-down112
arrow-up1433arrow-down1imageCongratulations on Brooklyn's rulelemmy.worldPugJesus@lemmy.world to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish · 2 months agomessage-square15fedilink
minus-squareKazumara@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up7·1 month agoThat doesn’t sound right… From what I remember “woman” comes from “wifman”, which is a compound of “wif” and “man”, and back then “man” still refered to male and female persons, and “wer” and “wif” were male and female persons respectively.
minus-squareExecutive Chimp@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up6·1 month agoFun fact: my memory is shitty. Looks like you’re right except that “man” wasn’t gendered at the time.
minus-squareKazumara@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up8·1 month ago except that “man” wasn’t gendered at the time. But I included that, didn’t I? and back then “man” still refered to male and female persons Or do you mean rather than male and female, I should have said persons regardless of gender? I guess that makes more sense.
minus-squareExecutive Chimp@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up7·1 month agoFun fact: I can’t fucking read either.
That doesn’t sound right…
From what I remember “woman” comes from “wifman”, which is a compound of “wif” and “man”, and back then “man” still refered to male and female persons, and “wer” and “wif” were male and female persons respectively.
Fun fact: my memory is shitty. Looks like you’re right except that “man” wasn’t gendered at the time.
But I included that, didn’t I?
Or do you mean rather than male and female, I should have said persons regardless of gender? I guess that makes more sense.
Fun fact: I can’t fucking read either.