Skip to main content
5 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Dec 23, 2018 at 23:37 comment added jsw29 The quotations that appear in the answer are all indeed about pity being the sister of love, and leave unspecified the metaphorical gender of the latter. Wollstonecraft herself however says that (a certain kind of) love has been termed the sister of pity. So, if what she says and what appears in this answer are all renderings of the same metaphor, then that metaphor must have treated pity and love as each other's sisters.
Dec 23, 2018 at 18:49 comment added 1006a @jsw29 I used "siblings" because none of the quotes explicitly stated that pity and love are sisters, as in each a sister of the other; rather, they term one the sister of the other. But hypothetically the other could be a brother (or ungendered), so the more generic term seemed more appropriate to me. Just like if someone told me that "Jane is Alex's sister" I would describe Alex as Jane's sibling, not making other assumptions.
Dec 23, 2018 at 18:03 comment added jsw29 This answer provides a very illuminating explanation of why Wollstonecraft used the term sisters in this context, but it is confusing that its last sentence says that pity and love were termed siblings: neither Wollstonecraft nor the sources quoted in the answer used that term.
Dec 22, 2018 at 18:01 history edited 1006a CC BY-SA 4.0
Fixed formatting
Dec 22, 2018 at 17:55 history answered 1006a CC BY-SA 4.0