In response to the question in the OP - no, it doesn’t bother me that ships are “she” in English. There are about 10 bajillion things I worry about more. I suspect that the practice of referring to ships as “she” in English will slowly die out over time, but that’s just a guess. It also doesn’t surprise me that some people are offended.
…sigh…this is just soooooooo depressing.
In Russia, boats and ships are ‘he’. It’s a quirk of language, nothing more.
Everyone, knock off the hijacks and personal attacks. If you just want to go after another poster, take it to the Pit. If you truly are interested in discussing the broader issues some of you are raising, there is an ongoing ATMB thread where your input would be appreciated.
But none of that belongs in here.
These types of posts, commentary from the sidelines, are off topic and not helpful. Please refrain from doing so here and elsewhere.
I think it’s largely unrelated, at least from the 20th century. Some categories of US warships for example have long been named after notable past naval personnel. People selected for that honor until recently have always been men, so for example almost all USN destroyers since the type has existed in the USN near the turn of 19th/20th century have been ‘she’s’ named after men. It’s also not unusual among merchant ships. Ships on the US Great Lakes in particular are often named after past (almost always male) executives of steel and mining companies.
I’d add in general that in US culture (maybe English speaking world generally, to a lesser extent otherwise I think) language is more of a battleground over diverging views of the past. I think the US cultural divide now is more completely encompassed by ‘US has been basically good’ v ‘US has been basically bad’ than any other single difference. It’s often called ‘right’ v ‘left’ which also has some accuracy but think bad/good is more the source of the real tribal hostility that has arisen.
One manifestation of ‘we’ve been basically bad’ side is thinking it’s desirable or necessary to pick at other people’s use of previous accepted words and speech conventions associated with the past, to hasten the transformation to a new and different society that wouldn’t be bad. The ‘we’ve been basically good’ tribe reacts against that, and people in the middle often just find it annoying. Why exactly would it ‘offend’ a person that a long accepted trivial convention of speech is used? (for all I know calling a ship ‘she’ does genuinely offend some people perhaps, but it’s not that readily understandable to me).
This is not an accurate description of the left.
Sort of true. I think the divide itself is more ‘US bad’ v ‘US good’ than it is actually ‘left’ or ‘right’. Therefore if one focuses on real left, according to their definition, it’s possible they find that correlates significantly less than perfectly with ‘US has been basically bad’. But one side of the cultural divide, descended from the '60’s counter culture, definitely has past US (white, Euro centric, patriarchal, heteronormal etc) sins as a or the central issue (again not necessarily class warfare etc in traditional leftist terms, though sometimes that too), those sins to be expiated by transforming society. Which goes with picking at other people’s use of past conventions of speech.
No, not even sort of true.
Get that Scotsman in focus!
I was saying your point was sort of true. Mine is definitely true. 
And I’m not assessing who is a ‘real’ leftist as if that’s something good (or bad, it’s not really the point). Just saying that ‘US has basically been bad’ v. ‘US has been basically good’ (including Western traditional culture generally) is the clear point IMO of the most vociferous contention in US society nowadays. Technical issues of what’s really ‘left’ or ‘right’, terms which are less self explanatory, are not necessarily as much. But generally left and ‘US bad’ go to together much more often than not. Denying/reasserting that is not going to change it, but I think it’s obvious. Not couldn’t be good, if transformed, including stuff like what terms people use or call ships ‘she’.
No, it’s not. It simply is not. It doesn’t matter how many times you say this. This is not what the left is about.
Corry El and Acsenray, if you want to continue your discussion on defining the right and left in the US, please take it to another thread. Thanks.
There are some countries like Germany and Russia (like previously stated) that almost exclusively refer to ships in masculine terms. I don’t know if that’s better or worse but it’s not exclusively only for women.
I never thought about cars as having personalities until we owned a used Suzuki Sidekick (purchased in a place in which you had little choice in cars, new or used, and as newlyweds we had even less choice). That car was a true PITA. One time a friend from far away that I hadn’t seen in years was going to be near us for the weekend. We were thrilled that we were going to eat dinner with her. Out to the car, and it would not start. Didn’t need a jump, but it would not start. Eventually we found that the car’s computer had died. Not the first time the car proved unreliable, but it was then we christened the car Lucy. Short for Lucille, as in “You picked a fine time to leave us.” After that, every car we have owned got a female name. Red Hyundai was Rosie, Gold Subaru was Goldie, silver Subaru is Sylvia. The white Nissan Versa was harder to find a name for. Eventually, we settled in Jackie, as the car was white, and as the cheapest car on the market at the time, rather cheesy.
We name the cars and the musical instruments, and Mr. CK names his bicycles.
Our cars have female names. No, it doesn’t bother me. Neither does referring to nautical vessels as “she”. I’m sure it was never intended as a slur against women. I have other injustices to worry about.
My schooner, the SS Social Justice Warrior, self-identifies as a transgendered lesbian.
Nice.
Really not a helpful comment, and we’ve already asked folks not to derail the thread. If you’re not interested in contributing to the question, stay out of the thread, please.
True story this reminds me of. When I was at the Bangkok Post, a government cabinet minister was stepping down. One of the major positions, I think the Industry Ministry. As is typical of so many upper-class Chinese-Thai businessmen, he acted like he was the King himself, but this guy took it to extremes. Was always accompanied by a large entourage, would never enter a room until his minions had gone in first and ensured everyone was standing at deferential attention, the whole nine yards to a ridiculous measure. In our story about him taking his leave, he had expressed confidence his successor would continue his policies at the ministry. So with his leaving and his certainty of continuity, we came up with the story headline, “Steady as She Goes.”
Before the paper could go to print, we were admonished by a couple of the upper editors. Said we had to change it to “Steady as He Goes.” What we farangs (Westerners) on the Business desk were unaware of was the minister was also gay and, with his arrogance, would certainly take it as a slight on his sexuality and take action against the newspaper. We thought it a great headline and argued to keep it, explaining it was a nautical term that would sound completely screwy rendered as “Steady as He Goes,” but this was not an expression Thais knew, and the minister was not a guy to mess around with, so we had to ditch that altogether, because there was no way we were going to change “She” to “He.”
I like the cut of your jib.
I don’t think rails are the correct metaphor here. Let’s not allow the thread to capsize, or take on water, or lose its bearings, or for its sails to begin luffing.