Ukraine told critics of the pace of its three-month-old counteroffensive to "shut up" on Thursday, the sharpest signal yet of Kyiv's frustration at leaks from Western officials that say its forces are advancing too slowly.
you don’t really have to support Putin per se, many of us including myself would feel glee watching him be put up against a wall by communist revolutionaries, but supporting NATO is a pretty big dealbreaker given NATO’s imperialist and fascist history. e.g. Several Nazi German officials being put into NATO’s government. Gladio and funding of fascist stay-behind groups in the event of Soviet invasion. Yugoslavia. Libya. I certainly want NATO to be destroyed, hopefully from within rather than without to prevent nuclear war, and unfortunately for us, the reactionary state of Russia seems to be the best bet to maybe have that eventually occur.
also, stop calling things “wars of aggression” unless you’re going to call everything a war of aggression, my god. what an annoying thought-terminating cliche.
Very typical lib talking point though. What socialist spaces do you get your news and information from? Any at all? Or do you just immerse yourself in liberal spaces then end up repeating everything they say and wonder why socialists all call you a liberal? Serious question btw. What socialist media and socialist spaces do you actually participate in and follow? How can you possibly consider yourself to have gotten rid of the liberal brainworms you’ve had your entire life if you continue to immerse yourself within the liberal superstructure?
I think you all made things pretty clear when you consider that the only thing I’ve actually done here is make it clear that I don’t support Russia in this war and am being blasted for being a “lib” for doing so.
You’re being delusional. I don’t owe you anything.
And not use misgendering language? We all make mistakes at times, it’s what happens, and it’s fair to ask questions to better understand, but being against it after you’ve been informed strikes me as silly
The only way I think it can be construed as misgendering language is if the parts of the idiom or turn of phrase are parsed individually, which is exactly the opposite of what you’re supposed to do with an idiom.
If this sentence is misgendering myself, then I’m the Queen of England. I get that this guy is a shithead but pretending that he’s also doing something wrong here seems to be playing for some esoteric own.
I’m not saying it’s not a thing, but I have literally never seen it used, and I couldn’t find an ngram viewer with a corpus end date after 2019.
It would never occur to me to say “go off queen” , in much the same way it would never occur to me to say “yass slay king” regardless of the gender of the referent, making them both gender neutral in my use.
I don’t think ronjonguaido is a shithead, I don’t think that it was done on purpose or anything, and I can see what you mean - I didn’t myself pick up on it being misgendering language. I think maybe it comes down to intent? I dunno. On the one hand sure there are phrases, but on the other, maybe we should question the gendering of idioms? Way out of my league tbh.
The idiom isn’t gendered, a component of it is. Likening someone to ‘the little dutch boy with his finger in the dyke’ makes no claim on the gender status of the referent and is equally applicable across all genders. If they insisted on calling you Mr. Egon, then sure, that’s misgendering, but ‘go off king’ is a established turn of phrase that I have also seen generically applied because it likewise makes no claim to the gender status of the individual referred.
There’s a lot of gendered turns of phrases, which doesn’t necessarily make them acceptable. I make a lot of mistakes myself it’s alright, it’s what happens.
Wait until you find out that “go off queen” is also a thing. I wonder why “go off king” and “go off queen” has to both exist. Could it be that this idiomatic expression is a gendered one and that using the expression on someone who doesn’t identify with that gender is a form of misgendering?
I haven’t seen either of these phrases, but in my experience even when something is supposed to be the equivalent versions of each other, it somehow feels different to hear and say. Like, it feels alright to call my group of friends “bros” but not “sisses.” Could it be that “go off queen” and “go off king” have different connotations despite the fact that they should mean the same thing?
The reason that one version of the “go off” phrase (identical in every way to the other except for one word that specifies gender) might feel to you like it has different connotations is because we live in a patriarchal society that doesn’t assign value the same across all genders. That’s not an excuse to use the version of that phrase which misgenders someone.
And your example is really weird and obscures what’s actually at issue. The difference in meaning between the words “bros” and “sissies” goes way beyond just a difference in gender. One is a common and generally affectionate term that men call each other when being friendly. The other is most often used as misogynistic term to insult men by disparaging their masculinity.
And your example is really weird and obscures what’s actually at issue. The difference in meaning between the words “bros” and “sissies” goes way beyond just a difference in gender. One is a common and generally affectionate term that men call each other when being friendly. The other is most often used as a misogynistic term to insult men by disparaging their masculinity.
I wanted to give a couple of other examples too, but that’s just what I thought of at the moment. “Hey guys” or “hey dudes” also works though.
That’s not an excuse to use the version of that phrase which misgenders someone.
I’m a socialist, but go off king.
Socialism with State Department Talking Points Characteristics.
You might claim you are, but you’re acting like a
and actions are what determine what we are
Acting like a lib for pointing out an abundance of blatant misinformation? 🤔
You are a lib for disagreeing with me, the one true leftist.
I sadly cannot see your externally hosted image. I am sure however that it was revisionism, so I choose to feel no sadness
It’s a reaction gif, but we all know your assumption game could use a little work.
I assumed it was reactionary, and boy was I right
I assumed you were a dickhead, and wow was I right
Good one.
Owned
Aw, you think you’re not a liberal
So I’m not a true socialist unless I support Putin’s war of aggression. Got it.
you don’t really have to support Putin per se, many of us including myself would feel glee watching him be put up against a wall by communist revolutionaries, but supporting NATO is a pretty big dealbreaker given NATO’s imperialist and fascist history. e.g. Several Nazi German officials being put into NATO’s government. Gladio and funding of fascist stay-behind groups in the event of Soviet invasion. Yugoslavia. Libya. I certainly want NATO to be destroyed, hopefully from within rather than without to prevent nuclear war, and unfortunately for us, the reactionary state of Russia seems to be the best bet to maybe have that eventually occur.
also, stop calling things “wars of aggression” unless you’re going to call everything a war of aggression, my god. what an annoying thought-terminating cliche.
Absolutely nobody has said that except you.
Very typical lib talking point though. What socialist spaces do you get your news and information from? Any at all? Or do you just immerse yourself in liberal spaces then end up repeating everything they say and wonder why socialists all call you a liberal? Serious question btw. What socialist media and socialist spaces do you actually participate in and follow? How can you possibly consider yourself to have gotten rid of the liberal brainworms you’ve had your entire life if you continue to immerse yourself within the liberal superstructure?
I think you all made things pretty clear when you consider that the only thing I’ve actually done here is make it clear that I don’t support Russia in this war and am being blasted for being a “lib” for doing so.
You’re being delusional. I don’t owe you anything.
deleted by creator
Couldn’t resist that misgendering urge huh?
Please respect other users pronouns even if you politically disagree with them
Thank you ♥️
Removed by mod
I simply wouldn’t use misgendering turns of phrase
Removed by mod
And not use misgendering language? We all make mistakes at times, it’s what happens, and it’s fair to ask questions to better understand, but being against it after you’ve been informed strikes me as silly
The only way I think it can be construed as misgendering language is if the parts of the idiom or turn of phrase are parsed individually, which is exactly the opposite of what you’re supposed to do with an idiom.
If this sentence is misgendering myself, then I’m the Queen of England. I get that this guy is a shithead but pretending that he’s also doing something wrong here seems to be playing for some esoteric own.
“Go off queen” is 100% a thing, which means that “go off king” isn’t just a neutral idiomatic expression, but a gendered idiomatic expression.
I’m not saying it’s not a thing, but I have literally never seen it used, and I couldn’t find an ngram viewer with a corpus end date after 2019.
It would never occur to me to say “go off queen” , in much the same way it would never occur to me to say “yass slay king” regardless of the gender of the referent, making them both gender neutral in my use.
I don’t think ronjonguaido is a shithead, I don’t think that it was done on purpose or anything, and I can see what you mean - I didn’t myself pick up on it being misgendering language. I think maybe it comes down to intent? I dunno. On the one hand sure there are phrases, but on the other, maybe we should question the gendering of idioms? Way out of my league tbh.
The idiom isn’t gendered, a component of it is. Likening someone to ‘the little dutch boy with his finger in the dyke’ makes no claim on the gender status of the referent and is equally applicable across all genders. If they insisted on calling you Mr. Egon, then sure, that’s misgendering, but ‘go off king’ is a established turn of phrase that I have also seen generically applied because it likewise makes no claim to the gender status of the individual referred.
Then go ahead, we’re all waiting
Just “but go off” would work perfectly well.
There’s a lot of gendered turns of phrases, which doesn’t necessarily make them acceptable. I make a lot of mistakes myself it’s alright, it’s what happens.
Wait until you find out that “go off queen” is also a thing. I wonder why “go off king” and “go off queen” has to both exist. Could it be that this idiomatic expression is a gendered one and that using the expression on someone who doesn’t identify with that gender is a form of misgendering?
I haven’t seen either of these phrases, but in my experience even when something is supposed to be the equivalent versions of each other, it somehow feels different to hear and say. Like, it feels alright to call my group of friends “bros” but not “sisses.” Could it be that “go off queen” and “go off king” have different connotations despite the fact that they should mean the same thing?
The reason that one version of the “go off” phrase (identical in every way to the other except for one word that specifies gender) might feel to you like it has different connotations is because we live in a patriarchal society that doesn’t assign value the same across all genders. That’s not an excuse to use the version of that phrase which misgenders someone.
And your example is really weird and obscures what’s actually at issue. The difference in meaning between the words “bros” and “sissies” goes way beyond just a difference in gender. One is a common and generally affectionate term that men call each other when being friendly. The other is most often used as misogynistic term to insult men by disparaging their masculinity.
I wanted to give a couple of other examples too, but that’s just what I thought of at the moment. “Hey guys” or “hey dudes” also works though.
When did I say or insinuate that it was?