that’s my favourite theory, the germanic honor-culture has survived here and we value doing the right/honorable thing more than anything else.
i gotta take one look at your banking laws and who is banking in Switzerland to laugh that one out of the room.
The tjing you quoted sure as hell isnt the title of it. The main argument of the article is “Its all colonialism’s fault” and people pointing put that its not. Like yeah, you people, because anyone who critizes the treatment of minorities in Islamic States must be Islamophobic, just like anyone who critizises Isreal must be an Antisemite lol.
If you can stomach the absolute bleakness of some of their songs: K.I.Z. Especially their last album, “Görlitzer Park”, is full of anger, dread and descriptions of the moloch that is and was Berlin. Their albums are generally either “nonsense rap, with shock value humor” or “social critique wrapped in absolute banger beats”
The topic is persecution of LGBTQ+ folk and unless we wanna exclude the majority of countries from that list, we should talk about Islamic Regimes.
Because surprise, surprise, a patriachical authoritarian religion will come down hard on dissenters :)
it was a 4chan psyop, created to link LGBTQ+ people to pedophiles. And then some pedophiles coopted it. Ever since then some right wing idiots point to MAPs and go: “you actually want pedos to join you”, eventhoigh they have never been allowed to any pride event im aware of.
there are soooo many proposals, but thats actually one i like. of course, it would render the entire diminuitive meaningless, buuuut its cute uwu
In case of night this might work, but for words like might it doesnt. Might now becomes orthographically indistinguishable from mite. Right and rite also lose their distinction.
Fundamentally, the use of pronouns is to point towards something. And the more information is loaded into a pronoun, the better it can point. They arent here to validate the person, but to convey information and to point towards them during conversation.
People choosing their own personal pronouns, thereby choosing the way theyre pointed at, has the added benefit of validating them. But from a linguistical standpoint, all they do is change the pointer and the informations and assumption tacked onto that pointer.9
What the person above wants to express is: While neopronouns can be used in personal conversation, its not feasible to include them into the curriculum for anyone and the chance of your specific neopronoun ending up as a widely used one within your native language are near zero. I think your friends and your immediate surrounding should definitely address you by them. But especially with rapid changing pronouns or those that contradict the phonology of a language or that are close to existing words, they wont see much use. People will fall back to other pronouns, because it simplifies communicatiom for them.
finally, we can impose our gender norms and hierarchies on inanimate objects
Genus isnt sexus. The chair isnt female in Spanish because ancient Spaniard thought it might have titties, its feminine because of its phonology. La silla ends with an a, so it gets the la article.
Why does English still use actor and actress? why do you use definite articles instead of marking definiteness with prefixes? Why do i have to “i saw Mike steal your bike” instead of included something inside of the verb “see” to mark that i witnessed it?
Language is just that. An evolution of changes that happened throughout millenia and rarely was any pressure applird to that change.
You do realize that this is kinda bad, right? No english spelling reform ever took hold because of the vast difference in english pronounciation. your “nite” might completely differ from the aussie version of “night”. so you’d have to declare one dialect to be the supreme one. That’ll be fun :)
Secondly: Gender and gendered terms are sociallinguistic conventions. And they do not follow stereotypical gender norms. Often they radiate outwards from gendered terms for humans and then encompass things that follow similar sound structures. sometimes gender is historically motivated: Spanish generally divides things along the lines of “does it end with an -a or -o” and then assigns gender. But terms like “diversidad” stem from female latin words and retain their gender. “problema” seems feminine, but stems from a male greek word and is therefore male. Not because “tHe MaLeS aRe ThE PrrObLeM”, but because ancient greek sound structures classified this as “male-sounding” and Spanish ran with it.
In German, “das Mädchen” (the girl) is neutral. Not bevause all girl are secretly enbies or equivalent to possesions, but the diminuitive “-chen” turns things neutral.
all that to say: “Why dont they do that” can always answered with a resounding “Why dont you have feature x?”. Why doesnt English use eventiality or cases or dual and trial numeri or tones or different conjugations depending on registers? Because the language didnt develope that way.
it doesnt sound like that at all and latrine isnt even a spanisch word? Thats like complaining about the korean 니가 (sounds like neega) being to similar to the n-word. Or the eveb funnier discussion of american youth discovering the German “Digga” and immediately coming to the conclusion that this must be the n-word in disguise.
if someone wants me to specifically refer to them a latinx, ill comply. I dont see it getting any traction outside of this niche as an acceptable genderneutral form of declination. Latine fits better, since a lot more spanisch paradigms end on -e, from a linguistical standpoint. -x, i.e. /ks/ or /eks/ is very unusual according to Spanisch Phonology. And the vast majority of speakers will use the phonetically easier version, if they wish to change their speech patterns at all.
and by woke you mean they included black people?
Yeah we all know why. Because every time someone improves conditions for their citizens and nationalized american industries, they get Allende’d.
pls dont be a battle axe bi, please dont be a battle axe bi
The others ones are also iffy. Talking about the abolishement of a jewish state while using the phrase “the final solution” is just bad.
at best, it portrays a comical unawareness of history. At worst, this person is one of the “Hamas, Hamas, Jews into the gas” yellers.
Yay, someone committed le wrong, that means we get dehumanoze them yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay