If you aren't interested in what feminism actually is, yes.Deadcyde said:
True, feminism has a serious intersectionality problem, though I'm not sure that means it doesn't mean equality.Deadcyde said:
Most Bizarre Errors You Constantly See
- Thread starter PainInTheAssInternet
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You mean I just pointed out that contemporary feminism as a title has serious inconsistency issues, let alone as an equality based idealism, so you're seeking to obfuscate that point behind straw man (because clearly not believing your point of view must be because I know nothing about feminism) or gray area justification ("well, you're right about feminists not believing in equality.. but because I believe it to be, so it must be")thaluikhain said:
Come on, sure you see the logic errors in naming something that proclaims to be about equality for all genders after a single gender as well as the original ideal of empowering women that which feminism was named is no longer the single desired outcome of gender equality making feminism, at best a misnomer.(my original point) Secondly that none of you even agree on a mandate with some of it straying very far into outright bigotry in the name of "feminism" something any feminist proclaims to be outright against.
Ah, if you mean the name should be changed...I don't agree with that, but, I agree that name might not be the best.Deadcyde said:
That's certainly true, yes.Deadcyde said:
This.Deadcyde said:
People not understanding the set-subset relationship. It's possible to be both a feminist and an egalitarian. This is a lot like saying "I can't stand when people say 'Sub' when what they mean is 'Sandwich'"
You are creating a false dichotomy.
I'll be sure to ask my Feminist trans friend in the morning.Deadcyde said:
The problem here is that you're taking the views of a certain set of feminists and applying it to all forms of feminism. While it's true that there are feminists who believe that Transgenderism is an affront to womanhood or whatever, there are those who disagree. Most of the trans-hating kind are associated with what's known as the 'second wave' from the 60s and 70s but the movement, like all others, is always evolving.
It's a lot like how 'liberal' used to indicate a belief in property ownership, laissez-faire economics, and generally all the things that would be called 'libertarian' nowadays, but today means something totally different.
If you believe in the equality of the sexes, then you are a feminist whether you're the Trans-hating kind or the Trans-friendly kind. Just like if you believe in individual liberty, then you are a liberal whether you're the Universal Healthcare and Welfare kind, or the Free Market and limited government kind.
Did you know that when the abolitionists in America were trying to free the slaves they were only focusing on one race? How could they bring about equality for all races if they were only focusing on one race?Deadcyde said:
The answer is that white people didn't need freeing.
If I say 'We should free all these African slaves, man. I think we may be violating their rights and frankly it's disgusting', you probably wouldn't shoot back with 'Yeah well, white people got problems too man, sometimes they have to live on the street because they're homeless. I think you should be an egalitarian and help everybody man, not just that specific group you were talking about before'
I hate to be a pedant, but this is a thread of pedantry so I'll go right ahead:Elementary - Dear Watson said:
Anti-tank weapons don't specifically melt through tank armour.
Armour piercing warheads just smash through, various sabot rounds do it better.
HEAT warheads used shaped charges which create a pressurised jet of solid metal to punch through it.
HESH warhead create spalling on the inside of the tank armour without penetrating.
Incendiary weapons can kill tanks by incapacitating the crew or damaging the engine or whatever, but no weapon actually melts armour as it's primary effect.
But I entirely agree with what you said about games showing tanks 'catching fire but still working' after a few hits then blowing up after a few more. Either the weapon penetrates or it doesn't, and if it penetrates far enough into a modern tank to start a fire it's probably already killed everyone and completely ruined the inside.
I think it started with the movie "Bride of Frankenstein". The title refers to Frankenstein's wife, but the movie is also about Frankenstein making a female creature. Many viewers assume that the title refers to the female creature and that the male creature is therefore named Frankenstein.Lovely Mixture said:
Ooh, ooh, I have some.
Verbal fudge-ups:
- Turrent instead of turret, "squirl" instead of squirrel, "melk" instead of milk,
- generally instead of genuinely,
- people who think "then" and "than" are interchangeable,
- literally when people mean practically/figuratively/virtually. I listened to a radio talk show where some woman was saying "after our breakup, I was literally in pieces". What, your husband was an axe murderer? Don't abuse the English language, you silly cow.
- arcs instead of ask (that may be unique to the part of London I live in).
- pressurised when people mean pressured - "I was pressurised into doing overtime" - what, the boss came up and physically squeezed you?
- misunderstood/bungled phrases like "it's a doggy dog world", "walah" (instead of voila), "persay" (instead of per se), "more and less", "ect" instead of etc, "verse" instead of versus, "wet your appetite", "low and behold", "for all intensive purposes", "escape goat" instead of scapegoat...
- I have a special hatred for verbal cliches or puns that have become so overused that people no longer really know what the originating phrase or context was and the modified form becomes its own phrase. Like, "the eyes have it" in the context of a mascara advert.
- Here's one that used to infuriate my brother, but only partially justifiably. The use of "but" to imply "almost". "The man was found all but dead" - ALL but dead? What, so he was also singing, dancing, cartwheeling, basically exhibiting every behaviour associated with people who AREN'T dead? Of course the word "but" has multiple meanings so the example is technically fine, but it still sounds counter intuitive.
- Mixing exact and indistinct units. When a game is advertised as having "Over 14 playable characters!" I want to ask, how many, 15? 16? If we were rounding to the nearest 10 or even the nearest five it'd be fine to be vague, but why give us an exact, unrounded integer and then vaguely say "over"?
- Repeatedly pluralising. The word "texts" is already a plural, you don't have to say "I sent three textses". When I worked in a clothes shop I sometimes had customers asking where the "vestses" were.
Movie physics:
- Audible explosions in space.
- When a movie shows a planetary alignment and the planets are all neatly lined up like a row of tennis balls, completely disregarding their relative sizes or the massive distances between them (I'm thinking that shitty Lara Croft film).
- Related: big objects that stay big regardless of distance. Like in the end sequence of Sonic Adventure 2, the Death Egg orbits the Earth and passes out of view behind it - at a visible size that would imply it's the area of Asia.
- Some dude fires off a salvo of bullets, the action slows down Matrix-style and the bullets are all traveling together like a swarm of bees. Bullshit! Take an Uzi: 600 rounds/min, muzzle velocity 400 m/s. There'd be a 40m gap between each bullet.
- Zero inertia. Iron Man just fell from space into concrete, but he's wearing his suit, so it's OK! No, he should be pulp inside his (intact or otherwise) suit. Same with scifi, every time a ship goes to Warp or Lightspeed or whatever the crew should become a 2D layer on the aft bulkhead. I know Star Trek has "inertial dampeners" for this, but still...
- The anime-originated thing where a phenomenally sharp sword cuts through a person or a monster and they carry on walking for a moment before the two halves slide apart. It's just silly, it's like when Wile E Coyote walks off a cliff and only starts falling when he realises there's no ground under him. Well, OK, that I could concede to being a stylisation or artistic license. But when the person/monster splits apart and there's a few intact strands of viscera/mucous connecting the halves of the torso... that makes no sense. Did the blade cut through, or didn't it?
Verbal fudge-ups:
- Turrent instead of turret, "squirl" instead of squirrel, "melk" instead of milk,
- generally instead of genuinely,
- people who think "then" and "than" are interchangeable,
- literally when people mean practically/figuratively/virtually. I listened to a radio talk show where some woman was saying "after our breakup, I was literally in pieces". What, your husband was an axe murderer? Don't abuse the English language, you silly cow.
- arcs instead of ask (that may be unique to the part of London I live in).
- pressurised when people mean pressured - "I was pressurised into doing overtime" - what, the boss came up and physically squeezed you?
- misunderstood/bungled phrases like "it's a doggy dog world", "walah" (instead of voila), "persay" (instead of per se), "more and less", "ect" instead of etc, "verse" instead of versus, "wet your appetite", "low and behold", "for all intensive purposes", "escape goat" instead of scapegoat...
- I have a special hatred for verbal cliches or puns that have become so overused that people no longer really know what the originating phrase or context was and the modified form becomes its own phrase. Like, "the eyes have it" in the context of a mascara advert.
- Here's one that used to infuriate my brother, but only partially justifiably. The use of "but" to imply "almost". "The man was found all but dead" - ALL but dead? What, so he was also singing, dancing, cartwheeling, basically exhibiting every behaviour associated with people who AREN'T dead? Of course the word "but" has multiple meanings so the example is technically fine, but it still sounds counter intuitive.
- Mixing exact and indistinct units. When a game is advertised as having "Over 14 playable characters!" I want to ask, how many, 15? 16? If we were rounding to the nearest 10 or even the nearest five it'd be fine to be vague, but why give us an exact, unrounded integer and then vaguely say "over"?
- Repeatedly pluralising. The word "texts" is already a plural, you don't have to say "I sent three textses". When I worked in a clothes shop I sometimes had customers asking where the "vestses" were.
Movie physics:
- Audible explosions in space.
- When a movie shows a planetary alignment and the planets are all neatly lined up like a row of tennis balls, completely disregarding their relative sizes or the massive distances between them (I'm thinking that shitty Lara Croft film).
- Related: big objects that stay big regardless of distance. Like in the end sequence of Sonic Adventure 2, the Death Egg orbits the Earth and passes out of view behind it - at a visible size that would imply it's the area of Asia.
- Some dude fires off a salvo of bullets, the action slows down Matrix-style and the bullets are all traveling together like a swarm of bees. Bullshit! Take an Uzi: 600 rounds/min, muzzle velocity 400 m/s. There'd be a 40m gap between each bullet.
- Zero inertia. Iron Man just fell from space into concrete, but he's wearing his suit, so it's OK! No, he should be pulp inside his (intact or otherwise) suit. Same with scifi, every time a ship goes to Warp or Lightspeed or whatever the crew should become a 2D layer on the aft bulkhead. I know Star Trek has "inertial dampeners" for this, but still...
- The anime-originated thing where a phenomenally sharp sword cuts through a person or a monster and they carry on walking for a moment before the two halves slide apart. It's just silly, it's like when Wile E Coyote walks off a cliff and only starts falling when he realises there's no ground under him. Well, OK, that I could concede to being a stylisation or artistic license. But when the person/monster splits apart and there's a few intact strands of viscera/mucous connecting the halves of the torso... that makes no sense. Did the blade cut through, or didn't it?
"Alright" is not a word, but it's becoming a word because people use it so much. I won so many bets in high school against kids who saw "alright" in subtitles on TV, but it only leaves me feeling bitter because none of them corrected it afterward, and now Google Docs even tries to tell me "all right" is wrong.
I know words change over time, but I can't stand the idea that this one in particular is changing because of pure, unintended ignorance. It's mostly harmless, but it makes me wonder how often catastrophic mistakes happen because of this kind of thing.
I know words change over time, but I can't stand the idea that this one in particular is changing because of pure, unintended ignorance. It's mostly harmless, but it makes me wonder how often catastrophic mistakes happen because of this kind of thing.
A phrase that plays with infinity, is just begging to be modified. Why alright is right is, because it stresses the actual meaning of the phrase all right. Why all right is wrong, is because it stress the infinitive. All right turns does not mean satisfactory turns.Matt Dellar said:
I can't say I know of it happening, but as far as I know they've got a pretty powerful kick, and they've got wicked claws, so it's not such a stretch to imagine they could do significant damage. Just because orcas don't attack people doesn't mean they couldn't kill someone.beastro said:
I speak the Queens' properly, like everyone should. Putting an extra letter in a word is wrong, however, and is not the result of people pronouncing it in a local accent. People pronounce 'pronunciation' wrong because they don't realise that it doesn't have a second 'o' not because locally it is said that way.Tom_green_day said:Have you heard of this thing called 'dialect'? I'm not being sarcastic. It means that people in different locations speak in different ways and pronounce things differently. As a little off-topic fact, does anyone know that the American accent is closer to Old English than the English accent? When Americans are performing Shakespeare plays the rhyming and rhythm is more noticeable and accurate than when us English people do it. Just a fun factElementary - Dear Watson said:
For some reason everybody in League of Legends constantly type Thresh (A champion) as Tresh. Why? I honestly have never seen anybody else spell it correctly.
Okay, I got a few.
The word "unique". Either it's unique or it's not unique. If there's something, just one thing exactly like it, then it's not unique. A little unique? WRONG. Very unique? WRONG. When I was working at a store years ago, one person asked me, "How unique is it?" I don't know how I resisted saying that that was a stupid question.
The word "comprise". Hell, you almost NEVER see this word used correctly. A group comprises separate items. A group is NOT comprised of separate items. Separate items do NOT comprise a group.
Decimal point AND cent sign displayed in the same price? NO, JUST NO. I see stuff like ".99c" (c representing the cent sign) frequently, and that just pisses me off! The first person to make that mistake seriously needs to get fucked.
Lastly, gas station prices where the "3" or "8" is upside-down. JESUS FUCK, I see that way too much! For the 3, little curve goes on top, and big curve goes on bottom! For the 8, little loop goes on top, and big loop goes on bottom! But no... They normally have the big curve or loop on top. And usually it's ALL the 3's that are set upside-down! At least they're consistent, but still, they're consistently WRONG! I'm glad that more and more gas price displays are electronic... I just hope they don't find a way to fuck that up too...
The word "unique". Either it's unique or it's not unique. If there's something, just one thing exactly like it, then it's not unique. A little unique? WRONG. Very unique? WRONG. When I was working at a store years ago, one person asked me, "How unique is it?" I don't know how I resisted saying that that was a stupid question.
The word "comprise". Hell, you almost NEVER see this word used correctly. A group comprises separate items. A group is NOT comprised of separate items. Separate items do NOT comprise a group.
Decimal point AND cent sign displayed in the same price? NO, JUST NO. I see stuff like ".99c" (c representing the cent sign) frequently, and that just pisses me off! The first person to make that mistake seriously needs to get fucked.
Lastly, gas station prices where the "3" or "8" is upside-down. JESUS FUCK, I see that way too much! For the 3, little curve goes on top, and big curve goes on bottom! For the 8, little loop goes on top, and big loop goes on bottom! But no... They normally have the big curve or loop on top. And usually it's ALL the 3's that are set upside-down! At least they're consistent, but still, they're consistently WRONG! I'm glad that more and more gas price displays are electronic... I just hope they don't find a way to fuck that up too...
My very Christian best friend tried using that on me once when we were in debate over evolution. It's not his fault, he was once part of a crazy youth group (Young Life) that's leaders bashed anything non-Christian-like, and he was born stupid. Then he tried using evidence of "holes" in fossil records. I laughed.Vausch said:
American pronunciation errors of words of fresh non-English origins is pretty common place. "Cache" is not "caysh" and "heifer" is not "high-fer". I'm surprised the word "genre" hasn't been butchered. I know English is a mutt of a language, but the most errors I noticed come from American speakers. I'm gonna blame it on the education.
I came across something to this effect on imgur. Someone had posted;Batou667 said:
"It's better to be pissed off then pissed on."
Someone swiftly replied;
"Ah. The importance of knowing the difference between "then" and "than"."
I've already said this to a religious post that was turning hostile, so I'll respond to this thread. This applies to all of you and anyone who thinks about bringing it up in the future.Deadcyde said:
DO NOT BRING THESE SUBJECTS INTO THIS THREAD; FEMINISM, RELIGION, POLITICS OR OTHER HOT-BUTTON ISSUES.
I rarely use all-caps, so please appreciate how serious I am about this. I've yet to see a thread on these subjects that didn't descend into a hateful, bile-filled wasteland.
There are entire sections on this very site that permit if not encourage such behaviour. I'm not one of them and I don't want it here. Please go over to those threads if you're going to discuss this or start one of your own.
I intended this thread to be a light-hearted nit-picky thread.
Ever been to Anguilla? They speak English, but their accents are entirely different. I wasn't aware of this and wasn't able to communicate with them until my stepfather informed me. I picked up on what they were saying pretty soon after that. Language is a fluent entity; as soon as it's established it changes. I've never believed there to be a "correct" method of communication, as long as you can effectively communicate you're fine.Elementary - Dear Watson said:I speak the Queens' properly, like everyone should. Putting an extra letter in a word is wrong, however, and is not the result of people pronouncing it in a local accent. People pronounce 'pronunciation' wrong because they don't realise that it doesn't have a second 'o' not because locally it is said that way.Tom_green_day said:Have you heard of this thing called 'dialect'? I'm not being sarcastic. It means that people in different locations speak in different ways and pronounce things differently. As a little off-topic fact, does anyone know that the American accent is closer to Old English than the English accent? When Americans are performing Shakespeare plays the rhyming and rhythm is more noticeable and accurate than when us English people do it. Just a fun factElementary - Dear Watson said:
Not sure how I feel about poorly-written messages on the internet, though.
Bra sizing. It's amazing how an item of clothing this common is such a mystery to so many people.
No, cup sizes are not standard sizes. The volume of the cup in 28 D is completely different than the volume of a 38 D bra.
No, cup sizes don't stop at DD.
No, having a DD bra doesn't automatically mean that you have massive breasts.
No, you shouldn't measure your band size above your breasts.
etc.
I just don't get it.
No, cup sizes are not standard sizes. The volume of the cup in 28 D is completely different than the volume of a 38 D bra.
No, cup sizes don't stop at DD.
No, having a DD bra doesn't automatically mean that you have massive breasts.
No, you shouldn't measure your band size above your breasts.
etc.
I just don't get it.
That MI6 is not the name of the British version of the CIA, it's actually called the SIS.
I remember years and years ago in a Latin class when we were just chatting nonsense with the tutor and MI6 came up, I gave out my random interesting fact and one of the class nerds got all bent out of shape and called me a liar etc. I just laughed and conceded because he was getting so stressed, but I was and am correct.
I remember years and years ago in a Latin class when we were just chatting nonsense with the tutor and MI6 came up, I gave out my random interesting fact and one of the class nerds got all bent out of shape and called me a liar etc. I just laughed and conceded because he was getting so stressed, but I was and am correct.