Always let the truth be your definition. In this case it would be "There is no definitive, overarching definition".
@thepear7540
6 ай бұрын
What do you mean exactly?
@captainobvious8037
6 ай бұрын
@@thepear7540In most cases, allowing personal opinions and biases to flow into the definitions of.. things.. doesn't serve any purpose. So the truth is my definition. In this case it would be "manliness is (or can be) when a person displays one ore more manly qualities". Sure, there are certain qualities we know are naturally more dominant in men, and those could be declared to make up manliness.. but that's not exactly the case when it comes to how we use the term "manliness". The term is mostly referring to strength and bravery, combined with taking initiative and not complaining. So it isn't about the collection of all male dominant qualities we can make out. "Manliness" is more of a flattering and romanticized view on bravery and strength during times of hardship. Including tiring and intense physical labour, like smithing for example.. but in those cases the term "manly" can also be strongly related to looking good while doing something physically demanding. Hence why "manliness" is a romanticized view of typically manly activities. While typically manly activities and courses of action might absolutely be related to the nature of men, their desired and romanticized nature makes them exactly that among men, attractive and desired. It's a good thing to try to follow the example of brave and kind figures. What were we talking about again 😂 Right, the definiton of manliness. So it's either what i described here, or simply an umbrella term for all qualities clearly more dominant in men. I don't like that latter definition, since the term "manliness" would then hold barely any meaning at all.
Пікірлер: 8