31–39 of 39 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think policing wrongthink in everyday conversation is about as effective as painting the correct reflection on a mirror. Real respect is earned.
So when you refer to a group of mix gendered people as "guys", it's an indication that you don't respect the women in the group? They haven't earned if from you yet?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So when you refer to a group of mix gendered people as "guys", it's an indication that you don't respect the women in the group? They haven't earned if from you yet?
I think the reference is orthagonal to respect, making the correction merely rude.
Do you think if people consistently referred to a group of people that included you as "hey girls" you would find it....a bit strange?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the reference is orthagonal to respect, making the correction merely rude.
Well that brings me back to my original question (which you did not answer). Do you think if people consistently referred to a group of people that included you as "hey girls" you would find it....a bit strange?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well that brings me back to my original question (which you did not answer). Do you think if people consistently referred to a group of people that included you as "hey girls" you would find it....a bit strange?
It's quite ordinary. Particularly in all male contexts where it isn't ambiguous, like construction or sports. Also "ladies". Metonymy is weird like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's quite ordinary. Particularly in all male contexts where it isn't ambiguous, like construction or sports. Also "ladies". Metonymy is weird like that.
In contexts like construction or sports referring to an all male group as "girls" or "ladies" is derisive or, at the very least, sarcastic. It's interesting to consider the implications of that.
I find it a interesting quirk of human behavior. It not very noticeable unless you listen for it, but once you do, it is a very noticeable during a conference with a high rate of speakers that do not share your own gender.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's quite ordinary. Particularly in all male contexts where it isn't ambiguous, like construction or sports. Also "ladies". Metonymy is weird like that.
In contexts like construction or sports referring to an all male group as "girls" or "ladies" is derisive or, at the very least, sarcastic. It's interesting to consider the implications of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you, and would like to add my thoughts. I realize that the people on the left who engage in such toxic tactics are a minority, but I feel the need to say something: Several people in my friends/family circle lean very much to the right, and they don't seem to really understand that the left-extremists are the minority; and extremists on the right are clutching onto these rare demonstrations and telling t…
I followed the primaries closely, and based on the uniformly left political positions folks were taking, it seemed to me at the time that the supposed minority was very powerful. Consider the near-universal use of the term “LatinX.” Apparently, 76% of Hispanic people have never even heard the term. Out of those who have heard it, 2/3 object to it being used to describe Hispanics. Only 3% use the term themselves. http…
It's almost as if interesting but implausible left political positions are attention-grabbing and commandeer the news cycle out of proportion to their actual importance. Or that Twitter isn't real life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I followed the primaries closely, and based on the uniformly left political positions folks were taking, it seemed to me at the time that the supposed minority was very powerful. Consider the near-universal use of the term “LatinX.” Apparently, 76% of Hispanic people have never even heard the term. Out of those who have heard it, 2/3 object to it being used to describe Hispanics. Only 3% use the term themselves. http…
Note that the person who actually won the primaries, overwhelmingly, both does not use the term "latinx" and did not support most of the "uniformly left political positions folks were taking". It's almost as if interesting but implausible left political positions are attention-grabbing and commandeer the news cycle out of proportion to their actual importance. Or that Twitter isn't real life.
I do think that these folks may have more institutional pull than people realize. People here in the D.C. halo are increasingly insulated from what the folks they claim to be speaking for really want (or talk like or think like).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Note that the person who actually won the primaries, overwhelmingly, both does not use the term "latinx" and did not support most of the "uniformly left political positions folks were taking". It's almost as if interesting but implausible left political positions are attention-grabbing and commandeer the news cycle out of proportion to their actual importance. Or that Twitter isn't real life.
I agree. (I have to admit being a bit sheepish at being surprised how conventional Biden's speech was.) I was referring to what it seemed like to me at the time, based on what I was seeing on the news/on social media. My point is that OP's "friends/family circle" don't necessarily have the information to put what they see on TV or read on Twitter in context. I do think that these folks may have more institutional pul…