What about to refer to the author of this blog?San Martin said:
Feminazi was coined to attack feminists in general, though. Now, sure, there are people who are morally very wrong, often with no idea what the hell they are blathering on about, but words like feminazi, or generally anything else ending with Nazi, really aren't helpful.Reasonable Atheist said:
Because I am pretty sure that atheists are the most hated group of humans, strength in numbers.IOwnTheSpire said:
But she is literally advocating genocide based on radical feminist ideals. Strikes me as pretty Nazi, but also feminist. Feminazi, Totally apt. I would argue against using this crazy lady as some kind of straw man, but its not like we shy away from calling other people Nazi if the actually are Nazisthaluikhain said:
No, many words come to mind when reading this, but that isn't one of them. I just pity them instead that they are so lacking in orgasms that they cannot understand how other women desire enjoy sex multiple times a day and no it is not " rape" to do so. They are just very ignorant in their understanding of the enjoyment of sexual gratification, which is sad, but no I do not think spewing out equally ignorant terms would be the appropriate response.Reasonable Atheist said:
I would argue that the Nazis were clearly delusional as well, blaming the jews, serbs, polish, handicapped.... anyone else they decided they did not like for all the problems they faced in their country. The author of this blog blames men for everything they experience in their life, If she were to somehow obtain political power, what do you think would happen?Lil devils x said:
The difference of course is her ideas are not widespread, Most Feminists will have nothing to do with her delusional rambling. The Nazi ideas were very widespread, that is what gave them power in the first place.Reasonable Atheist said:
Well according to DSM-IV "... a pervasive pattern of disregard for, and violation of, the rights of others that begins in childhood or early adolescence and continues into adulthood. This pattern has also been referred to as psychopathy, sociopathy, or dissocial personality disorder" that was how it was qualified as Anti-social Personality Disorder. And DSM-5 seem to have only Anti-Social persoanlity DIsoreder and not eitehr Psycopathy nor Sociopathy. Sociopathy and psychopathy are both a bit fluid terms, and have no hard definitions.lordmardok said:
I do not actually feel bothered by this one, as "I could care less" is accurate. They cared enough to respond at all. They could ignore it completely. By all accounts the sentence and emotion behind it IS sound. Even though the meaning is muddled by what you feel about the wording.MajorTomServo said:
Oh ho! I see what you've done there. But the complaint is a pedantic issues with wording that isn't a problem at all, rather that you don't much care for it. This one should be brushed off, unlike say "irregardless". "I could care less" is not "I care none at all" nor does it mean "I care very little", and saying it isn't an issue to the meaning of your sentence. You either get that they don't care for it, OR you ask for the amount they do care about the issue, but foaming at the mouth on this very instance isn't worth it. Same as "10 items or less" or "10 items or fewer"..DoPo said:
A zealot could care less for their cause. As could somebody who barely cares. And all the shades in between. It is pretty useless to say - you could replace each word in "I could care less" with "blah" and you'd get as much information across.Armadox said:
Agreed! But "blah" is enough, I think, to get the meaning across of "this isn't something I care much about". So it's still an efficient sentence for it's use. This is a sentence that is designed to show disinterest, and it does. How much disinterest is moot, unless you demand of it. Off handed remarks tend to have the leeway of not needing to be defined unless pushed.DoPo said:
Well, no. You can have lifelike and incredibly realistic dreams as well. You can also have mundane, ordinary or just plain odd dreams, that aren't necessarily surrealistic. There's a distinction, and 'surreal' is descriptive enough to be warranted when applicable.rorychief said:
I getcha, I know it means bizarre and uncanny and sometimes dreams are mundane and unremarkable, so it can be worth specifying a dream as surreal. It come off as redundant to me because I assume the standard for a dream is to be dream-like, and I take dream like to mean uncanny and bizarre. Like the outlier is a mundane dream, so that would be the thing worth specifying. Like I assume a romance is romantic, so for someone to describe a romance as romantic I have to go, Wait what? Before reminding myself that an unromantic romance can exist as well.chikusho said: