You mean “Gun Manufacturing” (Mechanical Engineering), “Bunker Building” (Civil Engineering), “Things Hitting Things” (Physics), “Explosives, Toxins, and Poisons” (Industrial Chemistry), “DIY Alternative Medicine” (Pharmaceutical Chemistry), “Owning the Libs” (Law), “Ripping off the IRS” (Taxation and Accounting), “How to be Offensive” (Language theory, reading/writing comprehension), “How to win at Gambling” (Mathematics, Statistics) “Why Libs Think Like Pussies” (Philosophy), “War” (Geography, Geo-politics, International Studies).
It’s like you can’t read, let alone comprehend context and nuance, and then you call everyone else an idiot because you’re too slow to keep up. Keep up sunshine, what you’re pushing for is what we already intuit as bare minimum.
Except we do because I am one. Reusable bag using government responsibility pusher right here. So instead of being disingenuously belligerent, check your ego at the recycling center. Oh wait, they haven’t built one.
And those that argue for corporate and government responsibility do the things you are referring to, with the addition that they are smart enough to recognise personal responsibility isn’t enough and isn’t possible at scale without systemic change.
It’s not that you’re wrong, it’s that you’re wasting your breath preaching to a choir that has additional comprehension.
Bruh have you heard of packaging? Go buy a packet of chips in something that isn’t plastic, good luck purchasing those and toting them out in your reusable bag with that handful of sour cream, and pocket full of frozen peas.
And those that argue for corporate and government responsibility do too, with the addition that they are smart enough to recognise personal responsibility isn’t enough and isn’t possible at scale without systemic change.
It’s not that you’re wrong, it’s that you’re wasting your breath preaching to a choir that has additional comprehension.
And in the same turn, consumers can’t buy a product that doesn’t exist. Until more environmentally friendly products are on the market made by the producers, consumers don’t have a real choice, abstention is not a viable choice.
I still need food, I require the ability to move those groceries from the shop to my car to my house, but if no one produces an environmentally friendly way to do so then I’m at the mercy of the plastic bags, bottles, containers, and wrapping I’ve been provided.
Just like we couldn’t use unleaded gasoline until they started making unleaded gasoline.
Just like we can’t start using renuable energy until they start making renuable energy.
Just like we can’t recycle our waste because we don’t have the infrastructure to recycle our waste.
Just like we can’t take mass transport that hasn’t been built, or use green energy infrastructure that doesn’t exist, or buy products without plastic that don’t exist.
This is language theory not pandering or looking to excuse the use of deliberately discriminatory language or racial epithets, but a master class on understanding the nuance between offensive language and inoffensive language and the damage that disingenuously taking offense at inoffensive language does in stifling legitimate discussion of the topics and the disingenuous censorship of legitimate inoffensive language at the behest of a failed education system.
Fireman and policeman in English are also not offensive because they aren’t referring to gender or sex.
Human - Group
Humans - Collective Individuals
Man - Individual
Men - Collective Individuals (Non-sexed)
Not to be conflated with
Men - Collective (Sex Male)
Women - Collective (Sex Female) Wo - Female, men - collective individuals (non-sexed).
Keep in mind these are all traditional definitions and were constructed before sex and gender were determined to be separate and before intersex was a classification.
We now often conflate those in common English with human and man and person being interchangeable. As man (individual) with man (sex). And many others conflate sex and gender.
The arguments for removing gender from professions is based on the misapprehension that the professions were ever related to gender and as a result mass illiteracy has made it an “issue”.
Yes. We can talk about racial slurs without directing them at anyone. We can talk about the history and origin or racial slurs like spic and wog and (dare I say it in the hopes that people actually understand my point) removed. (edit: Lol, fuck censorship, but this helps prove my point below because you don’t even need to see the word but you know what it was and what it represents due to context)
We can talk about these words, the concepts and hate they represent, the pain they are meant to inflict and all of that context without being offensive or using those words in an offensive manner.
Here’s a little secret to offensive words, you can make any word offensive because as stated in my previous comment, it’s not the word itself that’s offensive it’s the intent it’s used with.
Fairy princess is offensive if it’s used to derogatively represent someone, and endearing when your 3 year old daughter wants to be one. Does that mean ‘fairy princess’ is a slur? Yes, but only when it’s used that way.
The difference that racial slurs have over other offensive language is that they are specifically created words for being derogative, unlike other derogative speech which reappropriates existing words and medical terms as insulting metaphor. But even then you can talk about racial slurs without being offensive as previously explained. Like we’re doing right now.
Ask yourself, is there anything in this comment you find “offensive”? Or maybe offensive words just make you uncomfortable. I’m comfortable around offensive language because I understand it and can recognise the difference between objective use of language and directed insults.
If you still don’t get it let me know what you don’t understand and I’ll bust out the crayons and we can get to figuring out which ones you like the taste of. (Clue: This is offensive but uses no offensive words, because context)
4·1 year ago
10910·1 year ago
15·1 year ago
You mean “Gun Manufacturing” (Mechanical Engineering), “Bunker Building” (Civil Engineering), “Things Hitting Things” (Physics), “Explosives, Toxins, and Poisons” (Industrial Chemistry), “DIY Alternative Medicine” (Pharmaceutical Chemistry), “Owning the Libs” (Law), “Ripping off the IRS” (Taxation and Accounting), “How to be Offensive” (Language theory, reading/writing comprehension), “How to win at Gambling” (Mathematics, Statistics) “Why Libs Think Like Pussies” (Philosophy), “War” (Geography, Geo-politics, International Studies).