"Clinically proven" oxymorons and misnomers

[Georg8]

Why are Stands called stands if they are made for sitting

 

[TheTygerfire]

But it's okay for a f*g to say f*g.

"You mean you have to be a fag, to say fag?"
"Well, Jimbo, looks like we've learned something new about you, wanna make out?"

I'm not double standarding the word like black people do with "******", you can use it all you want, just not as a general term for gay people. I still use it as a derogatory term.

 

[SmartIdiot]

Counter-productive. Well, most things with counter as the prefix. When someone's dead you don't say they're counter-alive do you?

 

[TheTygerfire]

I hate people who get all worked up when I say, "That's gay,"

One of the definitions (And a much, MUCH older one than "to be homosexual") of gay is, essentially, and obscenity, or a negative, odd thing. It's technically correct to say, "That's gay,"

Personally, I find it more offensive to call homosexuals gay. I also find it ironic. The term "gay" in reference to homosexuals came about as a negative conotation - you'd call anyone who was obscene gay.

If anything, both uses of the term should be halted. But since that won't happen, I refuse to stop saying my technically correct (not culturally accepted) use of the word.

There are very few things I would call "Gay" in that terminology, but seeing as I myself am homosexual and do it I don't see the issue in calling something insanely stupid "gay". I also use ****** to describe extremely stupid Politically Correct people or people that defame the homosexual community (like Perez Hilton, that guy is a huge fag)

See, I personally believe that if you're deserving of a derogatory term, it is alright to use against you. lol

Oh Christ, I never said I was deserving of using it, I just said I have no problem when other people (i.e. YOU!) use it when it means something stupid.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Flying high....


If you are flying arent you already technically high up in the sky?

No. You could be... flying low, buzzing the tower, etc. Altitude isn't implied by the fact that you are flying.

 

[Shoqiyqa]

I hate people who get all worked up when I say, "That's gay,"

One of the definitions (And a much, MUCH older one than "to be homosexual") of gay is, essentially, and obscenity, or a negative, odd thing. It's technically correct to say, "That's gay,"

Personally, I find it more offensive to call homosexuals gay. I also find it ironic. The term "gay" in reference to homosexuals came about as a negative conotation - you'd call anyone who was obscene gay.

If anything, both uses of the term should be halted. But since that won't happen, I refuse to stop saying my technically correct (not culturally accepted) use of the word.

EDIT: after a few comments on this, I would like everyone to see the definition I got this from.

Gay -

1. having or showing a merry, lively mood: gay spirits; gay music.
2. bright or showy: gay colors; gay ornaments.
3. given to or abounding in social or other pleasures: a gay social season.
4. licentious; dissipated; wanton
5. homosexual.
6. of, indicating, or supporting homosexual interests or issues: a gay organization.

Definition four is where I get this from. However, obscene is a rough synonym I used. I should have said, it means something morally unacceptable, overtly (obnoxiously) used, or something done, shown, used, etc. maliciously (or in the case I was mentioning) unjustifiably.

I think what I should have said was that it can be used as a synonym for wanton.

What's so bad about being wanton?

 

[Sparrow]

I hate people who get all worked up when I say, "That's gay,"

One of the definitions (And a much, MUCH older one than "to be homosexual") of gay is, essentially, and obscenity, or a negative, odd thing. It's technically correct to say, "That's gay,"

Personally, I find it more offensive to call homosexuals gay. I also find it ironic. The term "gay" in reference to homosexuals came about as a negative conotation - you'd call anyone who was obscene gay.

If anything, both uses of the term should be halted. But since that won't happen, I refuse to stop saying my technically correct (not culturally accepted) use of the word.

EDIT: after a few comments on this, I would like everyone to see the definition I got this from.

Gay -

1. having or showing a merry, lively mood: gay spirits; gay music.
2. bright or showy: gay colors; gay ornaments.
3. given to or abounding in social or other pleasures: a gay social season.
4. licentious; dissipated; wanton
5. homosexual.
6. of, indicating, or supporting homosexual interests or issues: a gay organization.

Definition four is where I get this from. However, obscene is a rough synonym I used. I should have said, it means something morally unacceptable, overtly (obnoxiously) used, or something done, shown, used, etc. maliciously (or in the case I was mentioning) unjustifiably.

I think what I should have said was that it can be used as a synonym for wanton.

This poster pretty much covered what I was going to say, and then some.

 

[Saskwach]

Counter-productive. Well, most things with counter as the prefix. When someone's dead you don't say they're counter-alive do you?

No, but there's no good reason why we couldn't. If we all woke up one day and agreed that counter-alive was a word then it would be. Language works by consensus, not consistency.
But in fact there is a good reason we don't say counter-alive. You see, "counter-" as a prefix means "opposed to the process of-". Since we tend to see being alive as a state not a process (notice how you say "being alive") it would be silly. That's what "un-" is for; the opposite of the state "-something". Such as unintelligent - the state of not being intelligent. But then there's "counterintelligence". Intelligence in this sense means a process - the gathering of secret information. Thus, counterintelligence means "opposition to the process of gathering secret intelligence".
But there's another reason: we already have very common words to express the idea of counter-alive: dead; and dying. Dead is the opposite state to life, and dying is the opposite process to living (thus, there's no need for counter-living). While the English language revels in creating more synonyms where none were needed, no language strains itself to create new words for old ideas. This is why we find "counterproductive": there really aren't that many near synonyms for the idea, and those near synonyms aren't near enough.
http://freethesaurus.net/s.php?q=counterproductive
Discounting the archaic words no one would bother using anymore (when did you last say "malefic"? I've read it once.) and the words in that list that aren't really proper synonyms at all (95% IMO) the rest just don't quite express the idea. Harmful means something slightly different (an implication of actual harm rather than just opposition to the process of being productive) for example.
English fascinates me because it keeps making new words by attaching prefixes and suffixes to old ones (nation->national->nationalise->nationalisation->denationalisation->antidenationalisation...ok, it got ridiculous at denationalisation). "Counterproductive" was brought in because there was a word - productive - that might be opposed, and no other word quite expressed that. Or perhaps it did and I'm ignoring that word.

 

[Shoqiyqa]

I agree on the ability to care less and "irregardless".

"Just because ..... doesn't mean ... " is another that annoys me. You could perfectly reasonably say that "the fact he's wearing a grey suit doesn't mean he's in the Yakuza" or that "her late arrival is not grounds for spanking her with a steel ruler," but saying "just because she's late don't go spanking her" is wrong.

I have to disagree with BiscuitsJoe. "UFO" is not an identification, any more than "an unidentified white male" identifies the suspect.

"I hate when that can happen" also irritates me. There is a two-letter pronoun missing from that phrase. With apologies to any Knight Who Say Ni in the area, one should say: "I hate it when that happens." Otherwise it's equivalent to "I hate some time between seven and nine tonight."

The same applies to "I want on top" or "Who wants in?" There's a verbal infinitive missing.

I al'so find my'self 'seething after re'si'sting the urge to put big red circle's around all the 'superfluou's, unnece's'sary and otherwi'se incorrect apo'strophe's people u'se.

Has anyone ever met someone who wouldn't believe anything not followed by "and that's true, that is," or is that another stupid phrase that ought to disappear?

 

[Shoqiyqa]

Altitude isn't implied by the fact that you are flying.

Technical terminology time!

Height is how far above the ground, water, ice, snow or lave your aircraft is.
Altitude is how far above sea level or something related thereto your aircraft it.

It's running out of height that's generally associated with crunchiness.

Altitude is not always above sea level. They work off air pressure relative to the pressure at the airfield or at sea level in the centre of the current weather zone (even if it's all land) or to a standard pressure, depending on their altitude and position.

 

[NeutralDrow]

...okay, I get the part about koala marsupials, but what's wrong with "clinically proven" again?

I think the fact I get pissed about it is just proof of how much of a nerd I am, so don't feel bad about not reacting to it.

What it comes down to is that you cannot clinically prove anything: clinical trials (is experimentation to assess the effectiveness of a new product) are an example of scientific experimentation, and because of this they test collected data against a null hypothesis. Yay for inferential statistics!

The resulting information (e.g. a p-value) demonstrates the probability of receiving the demonstrated results assuming the null hypothesis is true, and while this number can and sometimes is extremely small, it can't really ever actually be zero. Because of this you can't actually prove something false statistically; you can only clinically suggest it.

It's just that marketing likes phrases with more punch than that, I think, so hence we have "clinically proven".

Ah. I'm more of a hard science than pure statistics nerd (and I did terribly in that class, anyway); that didn't occur to me.

 

[Ossum]

People who say "literally" when they mean "figuratively."

Replacing "picture" with "pitcher"

Something I always screw up is "further" and "farther." Farther is a measure of distance, further is a measure of degree.

...and then I always imagine some stodgy professor losing it over being corrected. Stupid half-remembered movies! Brain, why are you dumb?

The War on Drugs-- it's not a war on drugs, it's a war on people who do them. Should be "The War on Drug Users."

 

[Ossum]

Something I always screw up is "further" and "farther." Farther is a measure of distance, further is a measure of degree.

Not strictly true... 'further' can actually be either. It is only 'farther' that can be used in only one sense.

That's true, but to get a lot of misnomers and oxymorons to operate, one must insist on stricter interpretation of English rules.

 

[BiscuitsJoe]

Also when people say "a whole 'nother" or "all of the sudden"
Those aren't even remotely grammatically correct.

I call Family Guy plagiarism!
Also, "the excitement of fishing is..." I know it's not a real one but, excitement? fishing?
WHAT!
EDIT: Also, "Bro, I didn't do nothing!"
What, are you trying to admit you did something wrong? Or are you just a moron.

Duh it was from Family Guy that was the joke