Phrases that piss you off

[Harpalyce]

"But to play devil's advocate..."

If you're playing DEVIL'S advocate, you already know the side you're arguing for is wrong. Otherwise you'd just discuss the other side like a good and rational person. Not everything has to be an argument, especially not on every single Facebook post. If you know something is wrong, and you're talking with somebody that gets that this thing is wrong, to ask them to go through an entire exercise to prove what you already both know is as clear a waste of time as can be.

 

[Kinitawowi]

"But to play devil's advocate..."

If you're playing DEVIL'S advocate, you already know the side you're arguing for is wrong. Otherwise you'd just discuss the other side like a good and rational person. Not everything has to be an argument, especially not on every single Facebook post. If you know something is wrong, and you're talking with somebody that gets that this thing is wrong, to ask them to go through an entire exercise to prove what you already both know is as clear a waste of time as can be.

Once again, The Simpsons have us covered:

For me? "Climate change denial"/"denier". There's an honest and legitimate argument to be had, and drawing parallels to Holocaust denial is about sixteen levels of hyperbole too far.

 

[Eddie the head]

Half of these are just people ignoring context then getting pissed off at idiom for not being realistic. Or better yet taking a joke as literal. Whatever you need to justify your anger I guess.

 

[Brownie80]

"You're reading too much into it." ~ Said whenever a person is attempting to start a critical discussion of the thematic meaning of a piece of popular art, usually accompanied by some variation of "It's just supposed to be a fun movie/game/tv show! It was never meant to have any deeper meaning." That may be true; the work may not have been intended to have deeper meaning, but it does anyway, because it was made by people. All people have values and beliefs, and those values will always bleed into the art they create, even if it's only subconsciously, and that unintended meaning absolutely worth exploring.

If somebody is starting a critical discussion on the thematic meaning of X, I think it's perfectly fair to suggest that they are simply incorrect. Sometimes a deeper meaning is intended, but that doesn't mean one deeper meaning is always correct. Look at the Tesco logo, then imagine that somebody interprets a homophobic meanings from it. Then imagine that somebody interprets a heterophobic meaning. Then you have 2 deeper meanings that are equally valid yet contradictory. A contrived example, sure, but there's no shortage of people able to 'read meaning' into X. Deeper meanings are possible, but I think it's going too far to state that they're always there because they are made by people (so are syringes and catheters - please tell me what they mean!).

Plus, what these people are basically saying is "I think you're wasting your time and energy discussing this, so I'm going to waste my time and energy to tell you that you're wasting your time and energy, because I think I know how you should be spending your time better than you do." And that's the best case scenario, because at least that implies a condescending sort of concern for the other person. Worst case scenario, what they're really saying is "I don't want you to make me think too hard about something I love, because then it might ruin my fun," which is a rather insecure reason for attempting to shut down a discussion.

If you don't think a discussion is worth having, then that's fine; don't have the discussion. Just don't chime in to tell others that they're "wasting their time," because then you're just being a jerk.

"I think that X is an insoluble problem that can't be definitively answered" is a reasonable position to hold. Otherwise debates and discussions would be restricted to those with "I KNOW X! What you think is wrong!" views on the matter.

Your dismissal of such counterpoints seems rather condescending in itself. Consider that what you're doing is trying to invalidate swathes of opinions that differ from yours on the grounds that they disagree on a metaphor. "I don't want you to make me think too hard about something I love, because then it might ruin my fun," sounds like it could easily be a response to somebody challenging your fun of deep interpretation of X, Y, or Z.

I see this all the time on music videos. Especially a Nirvana song video, and in the comments people are making 500-word essays about how Smells Like Teen Spirit is about the decay of society or some garbage even though Cobain wrote the song within a half-an-hour. Just my little anecdote though.

 

[Jacco]

"That was God working through you."

Hate this when people dump their diety onto somebody's accomplishments, and co-opt the credit for the person's success to their god. Or when people say things like "You can't do *insert thing, usually overcoming an addiction* without His help" Um, sorry no, I quit my addictions just fine on my own, to say that the only way you can overcome challenges in your life is with God is an insult to everyone who actually did it on their own without your magical, invisible sky god.

I hear this a lot where I live, and it makes me chew the inside of my cheek to not say something.

Well that didn't take long. Ugh.

When someone says that "God was x with/through/upon/whatthefuckever you" they mean it as a compliment. Not that they are "dumping their deity" on you. In their mind they are saying "you are special enough that the being THAT CREATED THE FUCKING UNIVERSE AND OVERSEES EVERY POSSIBLE ASPECT OF IT took special notice of you and saw you as worthy enough to "use." It's not an insult and the fact that you think it is just shows how closed minded you really are.

 

[TheNewGuy]

"That was God working through you."

Hate this when people dump their deity onto somebody's accomplishments, and co-opt the credit for the person's success to their god. Or when people say things like "You can't do *insert thing, usually overcoming an addiction* without His help" Um, sorry no, I quit my addictions just fine on my own, to say that the only way you can overcome challenges in your life is with God is an insult to everyone who actually did it on their own without your magical, invisible sky god.

I hear this a lot where I live, and it makes me chew the inside of my cheek to not say something.

Well that didn't take long. Ugh.

When someone says that "God was x with/through/upon/whatthefuckever you" they mean it as a compliment. Not that they are "dumping their deity" on you. In their mind they are saying "you are special enough that the being THAT CREATED THE FUCKING UNIVERSE AND OVERSEES EVERY POSSIBLE ASPECT OF IT took special notice of you and saw you as worthy enough to "use." It's not an insult and the fact that you think it is just shows how closed minded you really are.

So he's closed minded for wanting to believe he has free will, and for wanting to think that his accomplishments are his own doing, and not having the credit for them given to another?

They absolutely are someone dumping their deity into someone else's accomplishments by saying that;, because it's them essentially saying "You didn't do that, my god did that, you should be thanking him." You might be able to see how someone who's atheist or agnostic might be annoyed at losing credit for their accomplishments to something they don't even believe exists.

 

[MarsProbe]

"That was God working through you."

Hate this when people dump their diety onto somebody's accomplishments, and co-opt the credit for the person's success to their god. Or when people say things like "You can't do *insert thing, usually overcoming an addiction* without His help" Um, sorry no, I quit my addictions just fine on my own, to say that the only way you can overcome challenges in your life is with God is an insult to everyone who actually did it on their own without your magical, invisible sky god.

I hear this a lot where I live, and it makes me chew the inside of my cheek to not say something.

Well that didn't take long. Ugh.

When someone says that "God was x with/through/upon/whatthefuckever you" they mean it as a compliment. Not that they are "dumping their deity" on you. In their mind they are saying "you are special enough that the being THAT CREATED THE FUCKING UNIVERSE AND OVERSEES EVERY POSSIBLE ASPECT OF IT took special notice of you and saw you as worthy enough to "use." It's not an insult and the fact that you think it is just shows how closed minded you really are.

Yeh, it looks like the cool kids have arrives in the thread at last!

Moving swiftly on....

I have a particularly strong dislike for both the phrase "ludonarrative dissonance", as well as the "idea" behind it.

Also, "to be honest with you" - when someone says that, of course what they're trying to convey is that what they are about to say will be completely honest, but it makes me wonder. Does that mean everything they have said up to that point wasn't honest? Otherwise, why would they need to state that they were about to be honest?

"Lost my faith in humanity" has already been mentioned, but I would also nominate its counterpart, "faith in humanity restored". Usually accompanying some cloying article copied from a two bit website like upworthy or buzzfeed. Really, your faith in humanity can be destroyed/restored by one insignificant thing? I don't believe you.

 

[Silvanus]

Well that didn't take long. Ugh.

When someone says that "God was x with/through/upon/whatthefuckever you" they mean it as a compliment. Not that they are "dumping their deity" on you. In their mind they are saying "you are special enough that the being THAT CREATED THE FUCKING UNIVERSE AND OVERSEES EVERY POSSIBLE ASPECT OF IT took special notice of you and saw you as worthy enough to "use." It's not an insult and the fact that you think it is just shows how closed minded you really are.

I understand that's how it sounds to a believer, but it has an altogether different implication to a non-believer. It sounds to a non-believer as if it's taking their accomplishment, and attributing it to something else.

A compliment should make the receiver feel good. It's not a well-judged compliment.

This is primarily an error of understanding, though. I recognise the intention.

OT: "You know". It doesn't exactly piss me off, but it irks me for some unknown reason.

 

[cojo965]

There are a lot I hate.

Combined words. I really hate stupid combined words.
Like guestimate.
It's not the same as portmanteaus used for a reason. Like 'gorn', which is gore and porn.
It's just nonsensical words that make no sense. They actually weaken adn contradict the words.
Guestimate, is really stupid. Estimate is a exact word. Guess is a vague word.

I hate the ridiculous over the top stupidity of things like
I don't want to live on this planet anymore, etc. Anything of the kind that implies they want to leave the planet because of something minor and stupid.

Or that crap were they take one bad thing and act like they lost a nonexistant faith in people.
'I lost all faith in humanity' is one. Since when did you HAVE faith in humanity to begin with?!
And you're going to dismiss the nice and good people, as well as the bad now? Just because of one thing?!
If you have faith in something, it's your religion, not people!

Anything that implies animals are saints piss' me off. Or tries to enforce some draconian idea that every one wants a dog or cat.

Animals never hurt each other. Animals ar'nt evil. Animals are saintly. And all that crap.
Excuse me! Have you SEEN what predaters do?! Have seen what animals do to each other?! Some of them are freaking cannibals!

Dogs always love you. Dogs are so loyal.And all that crap. Nothing loves you like a dog. Humans bad, dogs good. Dogs are lovely and perfect.
They're pack animals. They're predesposed to swear loyalty to the pack leader. FFS!

Or implying cats are saintly. Or this idiocy
The sound of happiness is a cat puring. And variations.
Cats are mercurial beasts who take what they want. And for that I respect them more. If the cats purring, it's most likely because it got what it wanted. Not because it loves you.

And that bloody draconianly phrases rubbish that some have that everyone must love animals and have a pet. Especially dogs. Oh gods, the dog pushing is painful!
One of the worst is this
Every home must have a dog and every dog must have a home.

Excuse me?! Who the firetruck are you to tell me what I should have or not! I hate dogs! They're smelly, loud, and have disgusting habits.
I'm never having a pet ever again! For the record, my pets were budgerigars.
I don't hate dogs in a general sense. One of the best charities I've seen is Nowzad, a charity that helps people and animals in afghanistan, including dogs. It educates and helps the natives and sends the animals soldiers adopted back to their homes. Or find them homes.
But I don't like dogs personally. They're dirty animals with bad habits.
Nowzad is a sensible charity. They don't do the stupidity mentioned here.

Apparently the idiots think that everyone must love the animal of choice.
Despite these cretinous things being often on the same pages as worthy, boring, ranting about puppy mills and badly treated animals.
Yes, they really think sociopaths, dog fighters, and lunatics and idiots should have a pet.

Noticablely, people who have or like birds and fish, rabbits, guinea pigs, etc, they don't do this stupidity. If they do, it's well hidden and rare.
I've never seen anyone declare that you must love budgerigars or goldfish.

PC master race.
The total and utter cretins who use this obviously never saw the zero punctuation video it came from.
Were it was very clearly used to insult pc elitists.

Apparently the idiots who use it are so thick they don't get it.
And they never heard of the association with nazism that the words 'master race' has.

With all that stuff about dogs and cats, what is your opinion on other choices of pets?

O.T. Mine is something if I'm told this now I'll be pissed.

"Have some patience." I'm sorry but I have plenty of that but it has been half a year and the tech guy that's supposed to be fixing my gun has apparently still not gotten around to fixing it, my patience is not at an all time high right now. In case you think I'm exaggerating, I sent it in back in March.

 

[Funyahns]

Just people using the word literal and literally around me. While it is a very good adjective while being used in the proper context, like clearing up what could be misconstrued as a turn of phrase. I have been hearing it used though with word like "literally almost", or "like literally" it drives me crazy to hear it. I want them to learn another word called figuratively, but not use it either! Decimated is almost as bad but since it doesn't turn up in conversation its nowhere near as bad

 

[Elvis Starburst]

Nobody yet? Nobody at all? Huh... *Ahem* You Only Live Once.

Now, I don't mind the term when used in a context of "You only live once, so don't do *insert thing*" or something of the sort. Using it in a way to encourage something, like improvement, or not doing something really stupid. What I hate is when people go "Haha, I'm gonna throw myself in front of a car cause YOLO! *Herp derp swag SLAM! ... Dead*" THAT pissed me off to no end. Some people at my work dropped something on the ground, didn't pick it up right away and said "I'll grab it later, cause YOLO." Fuck... you.

I despise it when people use that term as an excuse for stupidity. It makes me just wanna yell at them, or at the very least tell them to shut up and use that term properly. Not just some extension of "Lol swag" culture. Yes, you only live once. So don't waste it by killing yourself in some dumb way cause "YOLO." Have half a brain cell, PLEASE

 

[SirDerpy]

I hate (insert whatever)

No you don't, hate is a strong feeling, it may have upset you that Michael Bay has changed the Turtle origin story, you might be a bit pissed as you stare at your original Leonardo figurine with tears in your eyes, but hate? No, so stop using it!

Hey, you can't tell me what my feelings are!

But on a more serious note, what exactly is the definition of hate? I mean, sure, we can all agree that hate is pretty strong, but how strong it is in actuality is a pretty subjective definition. And plus, sometimes people actually have things that they legitimately hate. I dunno, maybe their father beat them a lot with a reinforced vinyl record of the Beatles when they were young, and that's why they really hate Beatles music?

Although I'm one of those people who uses the word "love" way too much, apparently, so you might take whatever I say about words like that with a grain of salt.

OT: I don't really get ticked by improper usages of idioms, or teen-level hyperbolic usage of various turns of phrase, but something that always rubbed me the wrong way was "guess so". It just sounds so annoyingly apathetic, like the person saying it really, really wants me to just leave the room. Use "sure" or "I suppose" instead!

 

[Kolby Jack]

Nobody yet? Nobody at all? Huh... *Ahem* You Only Live Once.

Now, I don't mind the term when used in a context of "You only live once, so don't do *insert thing*" or something of the sort. Using it in a way to encourage something, like improvement, or not doing something really stupid. What I hate is when people go "Haha, I'm gonna throw myself in front of a car cause YOLO! *Herp derp swag SLAM! ... Dead*" THAT pissed me off to no end. Some people at my work dropped something on the ground, didn't pick it up right away and said "I'll grab it later, cause YOLO." Fuck... you.

I despise it when people use that term as an excuse for stupidity. It makes me just wanna yell at them, or at the very least tell them to shut up and use that term properly. Not just some extension of "Lol swag" culture. Yes, you only live once. So don't waste it by killing yourself in some dumb way cause "YOLO." Have half a brain cell, PLEASE

YOLO was actually originally a military acronym meaning the same thing, in the same vein as FUBAR or SNAFU. Knowing that it WASN'T created by 4chan or some shit makes me like it a lot more. I agree, though, that it's no justification for stupidity.

But automatically getting mad just because someone said it likewise is pretty unreasonable too. Do you get mad at people for saying "carpe diem?" It's a phrase. Get over it (not directed at you Elvis, just in general).

 

[Bedinsis]

I don't like hating stuff. Hate is one heck of a drug and it doesn't lead to anything productive, I find it better to try to concretize what I don't like about something then to focus on my immediate emotive response. So therefore I don't really "hate" any phrase.

Phrases that do annoy me however are those that are just codewords for "It's cool to hate things".

Like "Still a better love story than Twilight."
Or ~95% of all phrases online that involve Justin Bieber.

But even worse than that is "shove down our throats". This is because A. When this phrase is used, nothing is ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER being truly pushed onto someone else, and B. dat rapetastic imagery!

Wait, what? "Rapetastic"? How do you even

...

Oh. Oh! That's how you interpreted that phrase? I've always interpreted it as us being force-fed .

 

[Cerebrawl]

"It's just a theory".

Specifically to try to undermine science by conflating the scientific term with the colloquical term. (It's an ambiguity fallacy).

Drives me up the wall.

 

[conmag9]

Oh, more I forgot!

"Simple as that".

It is almost never as simple as that. This statement has been abused so frequently to casually dismiss another person's argument that I have an inherent distrust of it. I will automatically devote far more thought to deconstructing whatever the heck is apparently so simple that no argument can be raised against it. Nine times out of ten, it's simply incorrect.


Also, something that doesn't come up when talking to most people, but you hear it in fiction (usually from the villains):

"Did you really think..."

Anyone who utters this sentence instantly gets my back up. It's just so freakishly condescending that it makes me want to punch whatever over-the-top antagonists utters it, square in the mouth, until they can't bring themselves to say anything other than "ugggg". The weird thing is, other condescending statements don't usually have this effect quite so strongly. "Insolent fool" and the like don't do it, just "did you really think".

 

[Elvis Starburst]

YOLO was actually originally a military acronym meaning the same thing, in the same vein as FUBAR or SNAFU. Knowing that it WASN'T created by 4chan or some shit makes me like it a lot more. I agree, though, that it's no justification for stupidity.

But automatically getting mad just because someone said it likewise is pretty unreasonable too. Do you get mad at people for saying "carpe diem?" It's a phrase. Get over it (not directed at you Elvis, just in general).

I'll admit I have some personal bias cause of the use of YOLO as an excuse towards stupidity. I'm sure Carpe Diem was used in the same manner at some point, but it's not in the mainstream, or if it was, it wasn't in my direct time of knowledge. Sure, that can be pretty lousy, but I at least acknowledge it. Besides, I don't get full blown angry about the use of YOLO. It's just very annoying when I hear it used incorrectly. I'd like to hear people use it properly for once, not in the manner I discussed.

 

[tim597]

The Phrase "There's nothing worse than...". I mean seriously? There is nothing worth than getting sugar on the floor? Getting stabbed, shot, tortured or killed in the worst, most brutal ways possible is nothing! Compared to having to clean sugar off the floor. I understand that its not meant literally but still I can't stand it.

 

[lacktheknack]

But even worse than that is "shove down our throats". This is because A. When this phrase is used, nothing is ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, EVER being truly pushed onto someone else, and B. dat rapetastic imagery!

Wait, what? "Rapetastic"? How do you even

...

Oh. Oh! That's how you interpreted that phrase? I've always interpreted it as us being force-fed .

It probably doesn't help that the first time I ever saw the phrase used, it was coupled with "double penetration".

 

[Jolly Co-operator]

Anything that presents a cutsy-poo play on words like it's an actual argument, such as "We kill people that kill people to show that killing people is wrong," or "Lack of evidence isn't evidence of lacking." (There's a bunch more like that but those are the first couple that came to mind)

Congratulations, you twisted the English language into a whimsical little ear pleasing phrase. Unfortunately the amount of smugness you exhibited in doing so makes you seem like a **** and what you actually said was oversimplified and fucking stupid.

Yes, exactly, I couldn't agree more. I hate it when people think that just because they managed to word something in a way that sounds clever automatically means that they're right.