WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Discussion regarding the Outsider webcomic, science, technology and science fiction.

Moderator: Outsider Moderators

User avatar
man_of_foul_tofu
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:23 am

WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by man_of_foul_tofu »

I was looking at the characters here, admiring the effort and beauty of these stock working artwork characters.

http://www.well-of-souls.com/outsider/c ... cters.html

I have wondered at how long hair can work as a visual device in SFF, and I wonder at the effort required to maintain the hairstyles. I can think of many very elaborate hair displays that have been prepared and shown on TV, Film and as photographs. However I was wondering at the aged lady with great status shown below - and the hair being on the ground.

On the one hand, we have great status based on the elabourate hair and the length of the hair, but the hair is on the ground siniously placed behind the character.

Image

I was wondering if a static electricity charged anti-gravity or hair hovering aspect could be placed into the hair style. So it does not hang heavy like it does here (and if it were to be like this, it would be several kilos of hair, quite a strain on a neck)

Real hair hangs heavy, and not at aesthetically IMO.

I'd love some kind of technical solution so that respected elders can have long long hair, it's controlled, it follows the person like a gently waving airborne beautiful display of technical subtleness. Not as a twisted knot or a tightly bound platt than hangs to the bottom. Dont like platts. No idea how to consider the idea but I just thought I'd put it out to the forum to see what people thought.

Image

http://kittystampede.blogspot.com.au/20 ... -hair.html
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_zx740v7y8ic/S ... 890d34.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_zx740v7y8ic/S ... g_hair.jpg
http://scs.viceland.com/int/v16n3/htdoc ... 722/10.jpg
http://popcultureplaypen.files.wordpres ... g-hair.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-vuCu_cfVgI4/T ... ir-356.jpg

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Arioch »

Riess expressed one theory having to do with the telekinetic abilities of Loroi with poofy hair:

Image

I tend to draw long hair with much more volume than a realistic hairstyle would have; if Fireblade's hair were real, she probably wouldn't have any trouble rolling it up into a bun that would fit without much trouble into a normal helmet. Outsider would have to go through a substantial visual redesign to make it viable for a realistic live-action property. (Unless perhaps you did it very cartoony like Fifth Element...)

In terms of Greywind's hair being long enough to drag on the ground, I don't think that would be problem for someone at the apex of status... either the floor is always kept so immaculate that it's not a problem, or you have attendants to carry it for you (which I believe I have seen illustrations of for historical female monarchs). You could have mechanical anti-grav (or magical) devices that do this instead of actual people, I suppose... but that takes all the fun out of being The King.

Michael
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:51 pm
Location: England

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Michael »

:) lol how funny, it might be a good idea to have attendants carrying the hair, if in the end you do do her hair that long, would add more to her stature ("look at me, im so powerful i have people carrying my hair")
CJ Miller: How many millions must be banned before we stop having pointless arguments on the Internet?
fredgiblet: ALL OF THEM! Our banhammers will blot out the sun!
CptWinters: Then we will troll in the shade.!
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
man_of_foul_tofu
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:23 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by man_of_foul_tofu »

I like the partial Psionics concept - post battle wearyness results in tired hair styles.

Love the pic shown Jim. :) very Grinworthy.

Sanguinius
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:53 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Sanguinius »

Arioch wrote: In terms of Greywind's hair being long enough to drag on the ground, I don't think that would be problem for someone at the apex of status... either the floor is always kept so immaculate that it's not a problem, or you have attendants to carry it for you (which I believe I have seen illustrations of for historical female monarchs). You could have mechanical anti-grav (or magical) devices that do this instead of actual people, I suppose... but that takes all the fun out of being The King.
Maybe it's just me or maybe it's a Californian thing or an American thing or something else, but I can't but help at laugh at reading your linguistic gymnastics around female monarchs or "kings" i.e. queens. Seriously, what's with this aversion to feminine titles? why use masculine titles as gender neutral titles? is that normal over there? How far does this go? are there lords and ladies or only lords? princes and princesses or only princes? actors and actresses or only actors? where's the line drawn if it is drawn at all?

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Arioch »

It's not an issue of political correctness, just one of accuracy; a queen is not a female monarch. A queen is just the wife of a king. There have been queens that assumed the role of sovereign head of state, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Even in England, which did have a tradition of female monarchs, Queen Elizabeth I referred to herself as a "prince" when she was talking about her role as head of state.

My use of the word "King" in the last sentence was meant to be a humorous allusion to the line, "It's Good To Be The King."

Absalom
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 4:33 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Absalom »

Sanguinius wrote:
Arioch wrote: In terms of Greywind's hair being long enough to drag on the ground, I don't think that would be problem for someone at the apex of status... either the floor is always kept so immaculate that it's not a problem, or you have attendants to carry it for you (which I believe I have seen illustrations of for historical female monarchs). You could have mechanical anti-grav (or magical) devices that do this instead of actual people, I suppose... but that takes all the fun out of being The King.
Maybe it's just me or maybe it's a Californian thing or an American thing or something else, but I can't but help at laugh at reading your linguistic gymnastics around female monarchs or "kings" i.e. queens. Seriously, what's with this aversion to feminine titles? why use masculine titles as gender neutral titles? is that normal over there? How far does this go? are there lords and ladies or only lords? princes and princesses or only princes? actors and actresses or only actors? where's the line drawn if it is drawn at all?
If I recall correctly, Arioch is actually FROM the west coast. At any rate, remember: Queen isn't the only title used by female monarchs (e.g. Empress).
Arioch wrote:It's not an issue of political correctness, just one of accuracy; a queen is not a female monarch. A queen is just the wife of a king. There have been queens that assumed the role of sovereign head of state, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Even in England, which did have a tradition of female monarchs, Queen Elizabeth I referred to herself as a "prince" when she was talking about her role as head of state.
To be honest, while I wouldn't be surprised if a large number of 'masculine' titles in English become 'neuter' titles over the next two centuries, using Emperor for Greywind instead of Empress does seem rather like those folks that try to invent new gender-neutral singular pronouns for English. I agree that a choice needs to be made, and understand your reasons, but in a hundred years I expect that the idea of Empress or Queen being mutually exclusive to Ruler will be incomprehensible to most people. I myself didn't really think about the possibility until I encountered Outsider.

On a related note, you might want to put a note about this on the first page of the comic that refers to Greywind as Emperor, otherwise I suspect that a lot of casual readers will be confused.

Alexandr Koori
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:20 pm
Location: Moscow

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Alexandr Koori »

Hm.
In Russian and similar languages words "Empress" or "Queen" means and female monarch(Catherine the Great ), and wife of a emperor(A.F. Romanova).

Sanguinius
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:53 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Sanguinius »

Arioch wrote:It's not an issue of political correctness, just one of accuracy; a queen is not a female monarch. A queen is just the wife of a king. There have been queens that assumed the role of sovereign head of state, but that is the exception rather than the rule. Even in England, which did have a tradition of female monarchs, Queen Elizabeth I referred to herself as a "prince" when she was talking about her role as head of state.

My use of the word "King" in the last sentence was meant to be a humorous allusion to the line, "It's Good To Be The King."
Okay I'll answer this in 2 parts first some dictionary quotes:-

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/queen
queen (kwn)
n.
1.
a. The wife or widow of a king.
b. A woman sovereign.
2. Something having eminence or supremacy in a given domain and personified as a woman: Paris is regarded as the queen of cities.
3. Abbr. Q Games
a. The most powerful chess piece, able to move in any direction over any number of empty squares in a straight line.
b. A playing card bearing the figure of a queen, ranking above the jack and below the king.
4. The fertile, fully developed female in a colony of social bees, ants, or termites.
5. A mature female cat, especially one kept for breeding purposes.
6. Offensive Slang Used as a disparaging term for a homosexual man.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/queen
queen
noun \ˈkwēn\
Definition of QUEEN
1
a : the wife or widow of a king b : the wife or widow of a tribal chief
2
a : a female monarch b : a female chieftain

3
a : a woman eminent in rank, power, or attractions <a movie queen> b : a goddess or a thing personified as female and having supremacy in a specified realm c : an attractive girl or woman; especially : a beauty contest winner
4
: the most privileged piece of each color in a set of chessmen having the power to move in any direction across any number of unoccupied squares
5
: a playing card marked with a stylized figure of a queen
6
: the fertile fully developed female of social bees, ants, and termites whose function is to lay eggs
7
: a mature female cat kept especially for breeding
8
often disparaging : a male homosexual; especially : an effeminate one



Historical persons Queens/Empresses who were powerful autocratic rulers who used their feminine titles:-

Queen Elizabeth of England
Tzarina/Empress Catherine II (the great) of Russia
Maria Theresa Archduchess of Austria, Holy Roman Empress, and Queen of Hungary and Bohemia

I know of no historical text or english language dictionary which defines the distinction between King/Queen Emperor/Empress etc. as you have used it and your usage of it in this fashion is genuinely new and baffling to me. To say that female rule is the exception, not the norm in monarchy is a historically fair point I'd say. However I don't see what relevance that has when determining what title should be used for when there is a female ruler rather than a male ruler.
Absalom wrote:If I recall correctly, Arioch is actually FROM the west coast. .
That's probably why I said "Californian thing" because his posting blurb says CA, which I take to mean California, and I do know where on Earth that is.

User avatar
Durabys
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 1:57 pm
Location: Czech republic

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Durabys »

There is a disctinction. There is "empress/queen consort" - the wife to a reigning male ruler (close to 95% of all monarchs wifes were this ... from ancient Sumeria and Egypt until now) - or a woman who rules in her own right called the "empress/queen regnant" - which is e.g. Grey Wind. That is also why I am not very happy with the Terran translation that Arioch made - it is not historically, culturally and stylistically accurate *maybe Beryl could correct Alex's/Terran mistranslation when he talks to her about the history of the Terran word/term for Grey Winds office*.
Si vis pacem, para bellum. - If you wish for peace, prepare for war.

User avatar
Arioch
Site Admin
Posts: 4486
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:19 am
Location: San Jose, CA
Contact:

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Arioch »

Sanquinus wrote:I know of no historical text or english language dictionary which defines the distinction between King/Queen Emperor/Empress etc. as you have used it and your usage of it in this fashion is genuinely new and baffling to me. To say that female rule is the exception, not the norm in monarchy is a historically fair point I'd say. However I don't see what relevance that has when determining what title should be used for when there is a female ruler rather than a male ruler.
The dictionary definitions you posted yourself contain the answer: the first definition in both is "the wife or widow of a king." That covers 99.9% percent of the historical cases... the vast majority of women in history with the title of "queen" were not female monarchs. So saying that someone is a "queen" does not by itself inform the reader that the bearer of the title is also the actual monarch. So one either needs to add more information or use a different term to get that point across. In the disputed sentence in my post above, I meant a female monarch and so that's what I said. I could have said, "...illustrations of historical queens who were actually the sovereigns of their country" ...but I don't see how that would have been better. (I also could have said "queens regnant," but I'm betting many readers wouldn't know what that means, and I still don't see why it would be preferable to "female monarchs.")

It doesn't seem to me that this should be a source of confusion or controversy. I'm not telling you that titles like Queen or Empress shouldn't be used; I'm just answering the question of why I chose not to use them in a particular case.

Sanguinius
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:53 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Sanguinius »

Arioch wrote:
Sanquinus wrote:I know of no historical text or english language dictionary which defines the distinction between King/Queen Emperor/Empress etc. as you have used it and your usage of it in this fashion is genuinely new and baffling to me. To say that female rule is the exception, not the norm in monarchy is a historically fair point I'd say. However I don't see what relevance that has when determining what title should be used for when there is a female ruler rather than a male ruler.
The dictionary definitions you posted yourself contain the answer: the first definition in both is "the wife or widow of a king." That covers 99.9% percent of the historical cases... the vast majority of women in history with the title of "queen" were not female monarchs. So saying that someone is a "queen" does not by itself inform the reader that the bearer of the title is also the actual monarch. So one either needs to add more information or use a different term to get that point across. In the disputed sentence in my post above, I meant a female monarch and so that's what I said. I could have said, "...illustrations of historical queens who were actually the sovereigns of their country" ...but I don't see how that would have been better. (I also could have said "queens regnant," but I'm betting many readers wouldn't know what that means, and I still don't see why it would be preferable to "female monarchs.")

It doesn't seem to me that this should be a source of confusion or controversy. I'm not telling you that titles like Queen or Empress shouldn't be used; I'm just answering the question of why I chose not to use them in a particular case.
Well it's controversial I guess because it's simply wrong according to the meanings of words within the English language, in your previous post you said "a queen is not a female monarch." whilst point 2 in the dictionary I quoted literally states the exact opposite of what you say.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/queen
queen
noun \ˈkwēn\
Definition of QUEEN
2
a : a female monarch

To say Emperor or King also doesn't inherently denote an autocratic ruler in anyway either, Japan has an Emperor right now and he has no real political power, so he's in the same boat as Queen Elizabeth II now and her son Charles when he becomes King. I could easily give a list about as long as you desire of Emperors or Kings throughout history who have been powerless either de jure or de facto, so the title does not in itself convey actual power.

Within the English language like many languages, words have meanings and at times more than 1 meaning, this is quite common. So just because in a case where there is a patriarchal social order and the Emperor holds power and the Empresses is such simply by virtue of being his wife. This does not preclude the ability to use the same word to describe an instance of an Empress in a matriarchal social order with actual power whom if she were to have a husband he could be Emperor, yet have no power and hold that position simply by virtue of his marriage to her.

Solemn
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:35 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Solemn »

Arioch wrote:Even in England, which did have a tradition of female monarchs, Queen Elizabeth I referred to herself as a "prince" when she was talking about her role as head of state.
That's interesting, but you aren't (or at least, shouldn't be) writing for an Elizabethan audience, but a modern one, for which the distinction has blurred past relevance. Queen Elizabeth II is the only current holder of a royal office that most of your audience will have known over their lifetimes, with kings and princes being more a matter of "old stories."
Sanguinius wrote:are there lords and ladies or only lords? princes and princesses or only princes? actors and actresses or only actors? where's the line drawn if it is drawn at all?
We Californians don't have princes at all, sir. General Washington solved our "prince" problem a very long time ago.

"Lord" and "lady" are still used for "landlord" and "landlady," but I have found "landlord" used fairly interchangeably for rent-collectors of both male and female persuasion. "Lady" is more often used as the female counterpart of "gentleman," and "gentleman" hasn't really referred to "land-owning gentry" more or less since the land-owning gentry of the South tried to form their own separate nation. Instead, lady and gentleman are used as a polite or sarcastically faux-polite term for woman or man.

In high school drama classes, I had found several aspiring actresses who claimed they wished to become "actors."

The conversation would often go like this:

Girl 1: Wow, you're a pretty good actor.
Girl 2: Yeah, I think I could act professionally, or at least semi-professionally. I'd really like to become a professional actor.
Girl 3: You mean "actress."
Girls 1 & 2: :roll: Whatever. :roll:

javcs
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by javcs »

Solemn wrote:
Arioch wrote:Even in England, which did have a tradition of female monarchs, Queen Elizabeth I referred to herself as a "prince" when she was talking about her role as head of state.
That's interesting, but you aren't (or at least, shouldn't be) writing for an Elizabethan audience, but a modern one, for which the distinction has blurred past relevance. Queen Elizabeth II is the only current holder of a royal office that most of your audience will have known over their lifetimes, with kings and princes being more a matter of "old stories."
Sanguinius wrote:are there lords and ladies or only lords? princes and princesses or only princes? actors and actresses or only actors? where's the line drawn if it is drawn at all?
We Californians don't have princes at all, sir. General Washington solved our "prince" problem a very long time ago.

"Lord" and "lady" are still used for "landlord" and "landlady," but I have found "landlord" used fairly interchangeably for rent-collectors of both male and female persuasion. "Lady" is more often used as the female counterpart of "gentleman," and "gentleman" hasn't really referred to "land-owning gentry" more or less since the land-owning gentry of the South tried to form their own separate nation. Instead, lady and gentleman are used as a polite or sarcastically faux-polite term for woman or man.

In high school drama classes, I had found several aspiring actresses who claimed they wished to become "actors."

The conversation would often go like this:

Girl 1: Wow, you're a pretty good actor.
Girl 2: Yeah, I think I could act professionally, or at least semi-professionally. I'd really like to become a professional actor.
Girl 3: You mean "actress."
Girls 1 & 2: :roll: Whatever. :roll:
Having a basic knowledge of history isn't exactly "old stories". The vast majority of Queens were not heads of state. The Queen as head of state is, for 'recent' human history, an anomaly. Most recorded monarchies have been in primarily patriarchal societies.
The vast majority of "Queens" or "Empresses", or the societal/linguistic equivalents thereof, one looks at will be merely the spouse of the male ruler. The handful that were rulers in their own right generally did so utilizing a male persona/title.


Admittedly, using Emperor or Empress more or less interchangeably for Greywind makes sense - the Loroi are a matriarchal culture. They wouldn't have a native concept of males being in a position of rulership, though they may have acquired a limited concept of it for other races, but the similarities between humans and Loroi are strong enough that the experiences of the Loroi get spread back over onto the assumptions of humans (at least, to an extent).

Absalom
Posts: 718
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 4:33 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Absalom »

Sanguinius wrote:That's probably why I said "Californian thing" because his posting blurb says CA, which I take to mean California, and I do know where on Earth that is.
Sorry, I was under the impression that you were claiming that you were a Californian, and thus pointed out that he is too.

User avatar
Trantor
Posts: 780
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:52 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Trantor »

Interesting academic discussion. 8-)
Soooo, if Eight Dawn and Greywind shared a lover due to the well-known male-shortage, was his title "Queen of Kings"?
sapere aude.

User avatar
GeoModder
Posts: 1038
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:31 pm

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by GeoModder »

Of course not.

He would be called a drone. :lol:
Image

Sanguinius
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 12:53 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Sanguinius »

Solemn wrote:
Arioch wrote:Even in England, which did have a tradition of female monarchs, Queen Elizabeth I referred to herself as a "prince" when she was talking about her role as head of state.
That's interesting, but you aren't (or at least, shouldn't be) writing for an Elizabethan audience, but a modern one, for which the distinction has blurred past relevance. Queen Elizabeth II is the only current holder of a royal office that most of your audience will have known over their lifetimes, with kings and princes being more a matter of "old stories."
Sanguinius wrote:are there lords and ladies or only lords? princes and princesses or only princes? actors and actresses or only actors? where's the line drawn if it is drawn at all?
We Californians don't have princes at all, sir. General Washington solved our "prince" problem a very long time ago.

"Lord" and "lady" are still used for "landlord" and "landlady," but I have found "landlord" used fairly interchangeably for rent-collectors of both male and female persuasion. "Lady" is more often used as the female counterpart of "gentleman," and "gentleman" hasn't really referred to "land-owning gentry" more or less since the land-owning gentry of the South tried to form their own separate nation. Instead, lady and gentleman are used as a polite or sarcastically faux-polite term for woman or man.

In high school drama classes, I had found several aspiring actresses who claimed they wished to become "actors."

The conversation would often go like this:

Girl 1: Wow, you're a pretty good actor.
Girl 2: Yeah, I think I could act professionally, or at least semi-professionally. I'd really like to become a professional actor.
Girl 3: You mean "actress."
Girls 1 & 2: :roll: Whatever. :roll:
What's your point? that if an imaginary ditzy schoolgirl or some other ignorant element of your perceived audience would go along with something or couldn't be bothered with something that that should be the standard by which language should be used? y nt wr8 lk tis then? that'd make more sense, space is a premium in a comic format just as in a text message. Also, whether or not such roles exist within society today isn't important, words exist to describe the concept of such things, even if they do not exist today.
javcs wrote:Having a basic knowledge of history isn't exactly "old stories". The vast majority of Queens were not heads of state. The Queen as head of state is, for 'recent' human history, an anomaly. Most recorded monarchies have been in primarily patriarchal societies.
The vast majority of "Queens" or "Empresses", or the societal/linguistic equivalents thereof, one looks at will be merely the spouse of the male ruler. The handful that were rulers in their own right generally did so utilizing a male persona/title.

Admittedly, using Emperor or Empress more or less interchangeably for Greywind makes sense - the Loroi are a matriarchal culture. They wouldn't have a native concept of males being in a position of rulership, though they may have acquired a limited concept of it for other races, but the similarities between humans and Loroi are strong enough that the experiences of the Loroi get spread back over onto the assumptions of humans (at least, to an extent).
This point that you people keep raising is irrelevant, the frequency of historical female rulers is irrelevant, the "flat earth" theory stipulates that the earth is flat. I think it's quite well established that the earth is not flat, so the frequency of the occurrence of the earth being flat in history is zero. This does not somehow mean that the term which describes something that has never been ceases to exist for whilst the frequency of the occurrence of the earth being flat in history might be zero, the concept of the earth being flat is real and that concept is conveyed by the words "flat earth". Equally, if there never had been and never will be a female sovereign that would not alter the fact that a word does exist in the english language to convey the concept of a female sovereign, namely Queen/Empress.
Trantor wrote:Interesting academic discussion. 8-)
Soooo, if Eight Dawn and Greywind shared a lover due to the well-known male-shortage, was his title "Queen of Kings"?
In English, no, in Arioch where King/Emperor means reigning sovereign and has no gender meaning and Queen/Empress means spouse of the reigning sovereign, then yes, yes it would be.

javcs
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by javcs »

Trantor wrote:Interesting academic discussion. 8-)
Soooo, if Eight Dawn and Greywind shared a lover due to the well-known male-shortage, was his title "Queen of Kings"?
I don't think he'd have a title. At most, he'd get something like Prime Consort.
And, I'd think he'd only have a title if he were the favored male of those available to them, or if he were the father of the heir.

But ... he would also have been with a large number of other Loroi, due to the same "well-known male-shortage". There's no concept of monogamous relationships involving males (well, I suppose that female Loroi might not have variety, and only get the one male, even if she got to have him multiple times, but that's not quite the same thing).

Solemn
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:35 am

Re: WIP - concept characters page (spoilers ??)

Post by Solemn »

Sanguinius wrote:What's your point?
...it seemed to me like you asked about the local usage of certain gender-specific titles.
I, in my ignorance, wrote my observations of the conversational usage of those exact gender-specific titles.
Sorry, it won't happen again.

Locked