The alternative is that all new things are allowed until they kill someone.

Hey, for some clarity, I just wanted to mention that hyperbole isn’t usually read literally. People in truth don’t have a lot of problems parsing “the most X” or “this is the wooorst”.

Your guess huh.

Hi

Could you describe for me with references how this is objectifying?

If you are not from the same speech community, your judgement is off.

There are no good reasons why this post doesn’t state the questions.

Friendly reminder: anyone whose argument involves using the wrong pronouns for Chelsea is being transphobic, no matter how much argumentation they provide.

Don’t lie, you gross transphobe. People who support trans people don’t misgender them.

Did your parents explain it to you when you noticed all the innuendo on the previous version of the muppets?

Fun story: thinking you have been “educated to think critically” makes you more susceptible to all of those things, which are cognitive biases all humans share. It’s why the intelligent and educated are more susceptible to cult recruitment.

You are understating the popularity of Europe’s far right, btw

Abortion has been legal, common, and religiously and socially acceptable for most of history.

Bill Gates and George W Bush are classic examples of uptalk. It’s common in prominent political interviewers and so on. The link to assertiveness is a stereotype based on the fact that people make judgements about language that aren’t based on language - eg, uptalk is socially stigmatised, so people only hear it in…

You understand that “dudes defining the ideal of things for us” is one of the things feminism is against?

Neither. What you’re contextualising as “crazy” is usually totally rational given the assumptions of a person’s religious beliefs - it’s that the worldview is convincing and unfamiliar to you, not that they take leave of their senses.

Just world fallacy, we call it in psychology - and it’s an endless source of amusement to us that the groups seemingly most susceptible to it are fundamentalist religions and neoliberal atheist redditors.

i never got why people object to that. like, u understand ironic statement of the reverse of what you intend is like, a thing?

From the novel:

I feel like this shouldn’t be like a controversy? Because like, “the benefit of the doubt”, and interpretation of subjective lines? Like, if a Chinese author writes a line that associates “not-quite-right English” with misinformation, you would assume they were making a point about perception of their own speech, but…