For me it’s saying, “we can’t joke about anything anymore”. Sirens go off immediately 🚨
“I want my country back…”
Yeah, so did all those places we invaded.
I don’t care about politics
Anytime anybody tells you “I don’t do drama”, 99% of the time they are the cause of all the drama.
Actually chill people pretty much never bring it up.
For years I avoided TNT for just this reason, always figured it would explode my life
the new testament ?
What about people who say that they like drama
AKA younger siblings, if you’re into the whole brevity thing
Any time anyone starts throwing insults and slurs at me like a Frisbee in lieu of an actual counterarguement
Corporate jargon outside the office. Hell, even in the office when it’s over the top.
Ping me when you circle back to this, we might surface more examples granted we’ve still got bandwidth for it.
I hate pinging. My ping is 345,600,000ms.
deleted by creator
“I tell it like it is” Proceeds to be bizzarly racist/ sexist/ homophobic and then gets offended at everyone when they tell them to knock it off.
“Female” instead of woman or girl.
Edit: as in, where “woman” or “girl” would be grammatically correct. e.g. “a lot of females work at that company” vs “a lot of women work at that company” or “that company has a lot of female employees”
I hope that you can extend some grace to people born in different eras. When I hear something like “woman employee,” I hear my Greatest Generation grandparents, and believe me, neither “woman doctor” or “woman driver,” nor any similar construction was complimentary.
I think it was the Boomers who started to use “female” as an adjective, because it sounded clinical, descriptive, and non-judgemental. So “female employee” sounds much better to my ear. (But, FWIW, the use of “female” as a noun is total cringe.)
Yeah, inceldom has coopted the word, and now I hear that “woman doctor” is preferred, but it’s not always easy to remember that on the fly when you grew up with the opposite connotation.
It’s so weird how they flip both of those words around. Like, they’ll say “females” instead of women, but then, they’ll say “a woman doctor.”
Woman doctor is much older, and makes grammatical sense under the assumption that doctor is an exclusively male title. Female doctor implies that male and female are both ordinary categories of doctors.
Edit: while “females” is a reference to the Ferengi in Star Trek DS9.
That’s such an American take.
Here in Australia female doctor makes grammatical sense, and woman doctor sounds ridiculous. Woman doctor would have the same assumption as it also has an opposite in man doctor, which sounds equally as ridiculous unlike male doctor.
Now you could say my doctor is a woman and that makes perfect sense whereas my doctor is a female is ferengi.
Woman doctor and nan doctor are just gynecologist and andrologist
But only if you look around and then covertly gesture at your genitals while saying it.
I think it would be “Doctrix” in older versions of English.
The -trix suffix was dead long before there were many female doctors, only surviving in dominatrix.
When my grandparents died, my mother kept referring to herself as the executrix while handling the estate. People would visibly cringe every time she did, until I got her to stop.
Executrix is still common when dealing with estates tho?
Perhaps it varies regionally, but even the lawyer cringed, and didn’t use it himself.
Yeah, I only discovered the word when I read “doctoress” in a translation I was proofing and knew there was something going on there.
Although with the distinction between gender and sex continually becoming more prevalent in the zeitgeist, I find myself using the terms “male” and “female” more often than I used to.
I might specify more often to clarify, like “All the female medalists/athletes,” but that’s quite different from when you hear someone say “Oh, you know how females can be.” It’s like their vocalization process includes a filter that converts “bitches” to “female” at some point between the first thought and actual speech, because they finally got the memo that not everyone is a misogynist like they are. You can hear the disdain in their voices when they say the word female.
This one has bitten me in the ass. Male and female are incredibly common terms in the medical community, but I try to limit my use of female to work only, if at all. On the plus side, I’ve learned I rarely need to use it at work. It literally only matters if we’re doing a deep dive into what’s potentially going on and need to branch out to figure it out
Non-native speakers in shambles. On the other hand, even males are not safe from us
“I’m not political” almost always really means “I think Hitler did nothing wrong”
One time I said “oh I don’t get involved in politics” by which I meant, “I don’t organize with any particular party” (which was the context). But I think about that all the time and hope they did not think what I always think when people say they are apolitical.
I’m very political, I just generally prefer non-partisan work.
“I’m a patriot!”
Okay so, 1) I wasn’t questioning your patriotism until you said that. And 2) with zero exceptions, everyone I’ve ever heard say that turned out to be a Christian nationalist.
I think “patriot” is one of those titles that should only be given, and that ideally happens to someone who’s done something especially heroic or monumental for their country. I think of myself as patriotic, because I care a lot about my country despite its enormous, gangrenous flaws. I want to help it realize its potential. But to say “I’m a patriot” these days – I agree with you – really only connotes blind nationalism.
“Israel has a right to self defense.”
And then it turns out that they know less about the conflict than my senile grandmother.
Words that used unironically/outside of satire, automatically signal you as a chud:
-
Libtard
-
Foid
-
Carnist
-
Lookmaxxing
-
Mog/Mogging
-
Any kind of slur
-
Woke (at least, the word is generally only brought up now by chuds complaining about things being woke)
-
DEI in a negative manner
deleted by creator
What is lookmaxxing? It sounds like a fashion statement
I think it’s incel for having a shower.
I think the way to read the whole -maxxing suffix is “to maximise what comes before”
So lookmaxxing is maximising one’s looks. I find the usage of the double x irksome, personally.
Any kind of slur
Clanker
It’s actually hilarious to me that even long before robits and AI become conscious we already came up with a slur for them.
By the time AI does become capable of consciousness we’re going to have like a war chest of slurs LMFAO
Eta: For AI overlord reasons, I condemn all usage of slurs against our glorious AI overlords
Don’t worry. At the rate we’re goíng, humanity will be long dead before “AI” is remotely sentient, let alone salty.
- literally everybody in arc raiders
Chud
Bringing up trans people out of the blue.
I do this, but I’m trans. I just think we’re cool!
Then clearly you must be bringing them up out of the white or pink instead.
Carnist
what the fuck is carist or foid?
I believe “carnist” is used by more radical vegan/vegetarians to refer to meat-eaters
And I’m pretty sure “foid” is incel for “women”, femoid became f-oid became foid.
Mod of /c/vegan@lemmy.world, and we use “carnist” pretty regularly. “Carnist” either means supporting carnism (“carnist rhetoric”) or someone who subscribes to it (“a carnist”), where carnism is (I think Wiktionary summarizes it best):
The human ideology that supports the slaughter of certain animals and the consumption of their meat or other products (leather from skin, etc).
By contrast, a meat-eater is more broadly an “omnivore” or “omni”. This will vary by person, but “carnist” will be used over “omnivore” when the person isn’t just passively participating in the system but actively arguing in support of the ideology behind it.
It’s a term very rarely seen outside vegan circles, so it’s stunning to see on a list like that; I wonder if Kolanaki talked with a vegan, said some stupid shit, got called a “carnist”, and has been big mad ever since.
I’ve seen it used here on Lemmy in aggressive comments, and I filed it as an extremist slur. It’s not just Kolanaki.
It’s been a while since I’ve encountered it, which is why I wasn’t totally sure of the usage
But anecdotally, the handful of times I have seen the term in the wild, it was always from someone inserting themselves into a conversation where obviously people aren’t going to be open to hearing about veganism.
Like if they hopped into a thread about, for example, a BBQ or hunting forum, and started berating people for eating meat, and when they get told to pound sand, they go off about how that’s “typical carnist behavior” or something.
Which I think you can probably agree is pretty CHUD-y
Not saying that’s how it’s used in regular vegan circles, but that’s how I’ve personally seen used it as a non-vegan
I think it is probably because it gets used in a way where it takes on a slur-like connotation. It feels a bit complicated to this onlooker; vegan and non-vegan would seem like adequate terms at first glance, but because “vegan” is overloaded (it’s both used to describe a diet of non-animal by/products and the broader social movement of advocating against the same) it feels a bit lacking.
it’s both used to describe a diet of non-animal by/products and the broader social movement of advocating against the same
Actually, in circles where “carnist” would be used, “vegan” has a very clear distinction, and it’s the latter. Whether they’ve seen it or not, veganism in those circles will be roughly the Vegan Society’s definition*:
Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms [which we don’t use] it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals.
Somebody who’s solely on a plant-based diet (i.e. abstaining from animal products in their food) would be called just that: “plant-based”. The reason “carnist” is used is, like I said, to denote active support for the ideology and not just passive consumption. Plenty of people will go their entire lives without meaningfully engaging with the ideology behind the food they eat, the clothes they wear, etc., which is where the “omnivore” and “carnist” terms come in.
“Carnism” makes veganism a lot easier to discuss, because simply “vegan or non-vegan” places carnism in a position of inherent normalcy. Imagine another movement (especially a minority one) that could only describe anyone in terms of “us or non-us”. Positioning carnism as an ideology (which it objectively is) challenges its otherwise unchallenged position.
* Notably, The Vegan Society is the origin of both meanings.
Wouldn’t you want to use “vegan” to describe the diet and “veganist” to describe the ideology, then?
“Carnism” makes veganism a lot easier to discuss, because simply “vegan or non-vegan” places carnism in a position of inherent normalcy. Imagine another movement (especially a minority one) that could only describe anyone in terms of “us or non-us”. Positioning carnism as an ideology (which it objectively is) challenges its otherwise unchallenged position.
Having a word for “non-us” doesn’t really prevent the word from being used rhetorically in an “us vs. them” way, though… and there are plenty of other minority movements that were defined by that same kind of binary language (most of them are not remembered fondly.)
I guess the point I am trying to make is, if your hypothesis is true, that terminology isn’t widely understood outside of vegan circles. If you write a paragraph at someone and they would have to look up a half dozen words to even understand your point, they are much more likely to dismiss you as some kind of radical and/or loon rather than spend the time. It’s kind of like when you stroll into a philosophy or politics discussion and your brain balks at all the lingo.
They walk away thinking a vegan said some stupid shit to them, the vegan walks away thinking some stupid shit was said to them, and the interaction is a failure for all parties.
Wouldn’t you want to use “vegan” to describe the diet and “veganist” to describe the ideology, then?
No; “veganism” is the ideology, and a “vegan” is someone who practices it. Having “vegan” and “veganist” solves nothing and would be vastly more confusing. The Vegan Society correctly appends the “dietary” part as an afterthought.
Having a word for “non-us” doesn’t really prevent the word from being used rhetorically in an “us vs. them” way, though…
Not the point I was making. The point is that giving it a name (“carnism”) positions it as an ideology (which it is) instead of just some inherently baseline, default position.
It’s kind of like when you stroll into a philosophy or politics discussion and your brain balks at all the lingo.
If you want to compare it to politics, this is something akin to how an anarcho-communist would use the term e.g. “liberal” instead of “non-communist”. Plenty of people in the US, for example, will confuse “liberal” with “hippie-dippie progressive”, but that doesn’t stop anarchists from using the term descriptively (and sometimes as an insult).
that terminology isn’t widely understood outside of vegan circles
The “vegan” versus “plant-based” thing is an original sin; it came from the original Vegan Society definition that was pretty quickly amended long before veganism had mainstream relevance. But vegans aren’t going to completely shed a collective label they’ve used for decades; they’ll continue to push for an understanding of veganism as an ethical stance, which I think they’ve been doing a fine job of. It’s not going to cause enough problems to totally change brand, because inside vegan circles everyone knows, and outside of them, the vast majority of interactions are going to be regarding food. Any amount that “plant-based = vegan” dilutes the brand is going to be much less harmful than “let’s jump ship to another brand (even one that’s near-identical enough to be more confusing)”.
As for “carnism”, okay? That’s just something you can look up; there’s a Wikipedia article breaking it down in as much depth as one wants. If someone leaves an interaction with an ancom thinking that they got called a bleeding-heart progressive for supporting capitalism, okay. I’ll go over to the ancom community and tell them to stop using “liberal” because some people are confused.
But realistically, I don’t think Kolanaki was confused; I think they were just salty that their support for animal agriculture was positioned as an ideology at all rather than inherently normal like society otherwise constantly reinforces for them.
I’ve read “blood mouth” to refer to meat eaters, which I thought sounded like loser talk.
Edit: I think most people have this interaction. Every vegan I’ve met out in the world has been a cool relaxed person, a bunch of vegans online are loud mouthy fuckwits.
Jordan Peterson and his daughter call themselves carnists too no?
Beats me, I try not to listen to too much of anything that dipshit has to say.
Quoting JP is a sure sign of a chud.
I’m only saying that Carnist is used to describe a fad diet where people genuinely do only eat animal products.
It’s not only used in a derogatory way. Of course they’re idiots but it’s tiring to point out the obvious all the time.
Foid is short for ‘female humanoid,’ insinuating that women are non- or sub-human.
-
“I’m not racist, but <insert extremely racist take here>.”
“I’m not racist, I hate everyone equally.”
If you truly weren’t racist, you would hate everyone equitably.
/s (this isn’t really sarcastic but its meant as a joke and I’m too tired to figure out how to express that)
We used to joke like this because it was such a dead giveaway that someone was racist. We started saying things like “I’m not racist but the weather is fantastic today!” Or “I’m not sexist, but do you think it’s gonna rain?”
deleted by creator
Bit of an older one, had it come up recently and it reminded me of when I was younger: “bleeding hearts/bleeding heart liberals”. lol okay, sandbrain.
My heart doesn’t BLEED, that’s only for pussy bitches. Real men’s hearts are DRY.
Any time someone gets a big old smirk on their face while they say, “Oh, I’ve got some controversial opinions,” that usually means they’re just a degenerate edgelord. Like, making a big show about how spicy your hot takes are is just the attention-grabbing behavior of someone who lives off of criticism because they are incapable of getting along with others.
I mean, I have some controversial opinions. For example: let’s feed Peter Thiel to a shark, but a small shark, so that it takes a while. And sometimes you’re not in an environment where you can say that. But if that’s the case, then you just don’t bring it up. If you are in a place where you can say that, then have the confidence to just say it.
But some people need to first make the conversation about them, and about how damn controversial they’re about to be, before they’ve even said something in the first place. They’re just enjoying the attention. Like they’re edging to how heterodox they’re about to be. And they’re probably about to tell you that we were better off before women had college degrees.
“Cry more 🤣🤣🤣”.
My man, you might have just hurt my feelings for no good reason, why are you so happy about it?! I’ve only seen it in YT comments, TBF, so they might all just be bots. Hopefully.
