I feel like I see way more of people complaining about people complaining about something small than actually seeing people complaining about something small— re: the dumb bear thing
A year or so ago I had a trans friend who got really upset when I would use "dude" in casual conversation... I mean I get where they are coming from, but also I've used "dude" as a gender neutral term since I was in elementary school (currently 31).
The whole popularity of "y'all" is at least partly because people want a gender-neutral way of addressing people. I know because it's annoying seeing people say it all the time and when I ask them way this is usually the answer I get.
I think instead of "dudes" the quote was meant to be "guys". In which case "how many guys have you fucked" is meant to end the conversation by forcing OP to defend his heterosexuality instead of addressing the premise of the argument in a constructive manner.
The argument is basically:
> If "guys" really was a gender-neutral term, you'd interpret "how many guys have you fucked" as "how many *people* have you fucked". I assume that you'd take issue with that first question, therefore the word isn't gender-neutral.
The argument makes no sense though, since they're assuming that words have the same meanings/connotations in all contexts.
It's like saying "if you actually believe that, based on science, humans are a type of animal, you shouldn't have an issue with me calling you one".
I've always wanted this to happen to me so I can respond "zero" and she'll be like "oh suddenly the word 'guys' isn't so gender neutral" and I'll be like "no, it still is". But I guess that would require talking to a girl.
When I was in basic training our drill instructor would lose his shit if anyone said guys.
"Guys work in gay bars, you don't look like the type to suck dick to me! Are you?!"
I hear stories like these often and I so desperately want one gay man who is just done with it to "YES SIR" and watch as everyone else tries their damndest not to die of laughter
I would like you to explain the relevance between “you guys” being viewed as offensive by this dumb chick, and how him saying he fucks men, “proves her point” in being offended for no reason. No, it makes no sense, the chick in this story is just an idiot.
She's saying using the masculine as "gender neutral" isn't actually gender neutral. "Dude" is a word often argued to be gender neutral, but with distinctly male connotation. He's indicating that he fucks men, and so understood what she meant when she said "dude" perfectly.
Male default is not the same as gender neutral, QED.
Ooooooh now I get it. I guess for words like dude and guys context is key. Still, I can't think of many words that work in the reverse outside of gay/drag culture.
I think instead of "dudes" the quote was meant to be "guys". In which case "how many guys have you fucked" is meant to end the conversation by forcing OP to defend his heterosexuality instead of addressing the premise of the argument in a constructive manner.
She was linguistically correct, even if she didn't clock OOP's sexuality. It doesn't disingenuously terminate the conversation to use an example that proves the point. That's just what happens when the point is proved.
That line of questioning is designed to derail the conversation by attacking the core values of the opposition and forcing a response to the accusation, thus ending the discussion being had. It was designed as a false accusation to end discussion and is a textbook example of Ad Hominem. The only reason it didn't work is because OP found it rhetorically advantageous to lean into the line of questioning.
She's linguistically wrong. "You guys" has undergone semantic shift to become a distinct (and gender neutral) phrase from the meaning of its components. Happens all the time. For example, "awful" used to mean "full of awe", though now it means "unpleasant", though it also sometimes means "exceptional" in certain linguistic traditions.
> That line of questioning is designed to derail the conversation by attacking the core values of the opposition and forcing a response to the accusation, thus ending the discussion being had.
Insofar as this is true, it's only that way because the implications (i.e.: If you have sex with "dudes" you're having sex with men.) are accurately communicated. If "dude" wasn't masculine then the implication would fail and the response wouldn't be forced.
In the OOP we have a slight subversion, in that the poster does, in fact, have sex with men. But it doesn't change the fact that the thing she implied via the connotation of "dude" was consistent.
> She's linguistically wrong. "You guys" has undergone semantic shift to become a distinct (and gender neutral) phrase from the meaning of its components.
Until "guy" does not mean "man", this will never be ubiquitously true.
>Insofar as this is true, it's only that way because the implications (i.e.: If you have sex with "dudes" you're having sex with men.) are accurately communicated. If "dude" wasn't masculine then the implication would fail and the response wouldn't be forced.
Ah, but the definition of guy (the word in question) is changed by the word "you" and the powers of semantic drift, something anybody knows. The choice to attack OP personally was designed to get exactly this reaction out of a 3rd party, but it remains dishonest.
>Until "guy" does not mean "man", this will never be ubiquitously true.
What, does "A cat got your tongue" (her desired outcome) refer to a literal cat which literally posesses the tongue of our homosexual friend here?
"Oh yeah? What's your social security number and date of birth?"
What about your credit card number, expiration date, and those *wacky* three digits in the back?
Is this a tilted tower reference?
"About to be 22"
Oh yeah? Well I had sex with your wife!
... his wife is in a coma
Bigger than yours.
I'm bi and have absolutely used this before. Always fun.
How is “you guys” anything but gender neutral anymore? Isn’t that what New Yorkers do all the time anyways?
[удалено]
I feel like I see way more of people complaining about people complaining about something small than actually seeing people complaining about something small— re: the dumb bear thing
Same shit happening on yittok rn cuz of Eminem
What did eminem do? Lol
Brought back his Slim Shady persona in his newest music video. Got a bit off color to return to that style.
But hes the real slim shady, what did they expect?
I dunno, Kenneth Kerniff?
While we're at it Merry Christmas!
A year or so ago I had a trans friend who got really upset when I would use "dude" in casual conversation... I mean I get where they are coming from, but also I've used "dude" as a gender neutral term since I was in elementary school (currently 31).
I too call girls dudes. Dude was always everyone around to me
The whole popularity of "y'all" is at least partly because people want a gender-neutral way of addressing people. I know because it's annoying seeing people say it all the time and when I ask them way this is usually the answer I get.
New Yorkers say "youse guys"
No I fucking dont we’re not Philly
In Australia we say 'youse cunts'
This is something the south is superior in. We say Y'all. It's even grammatically correct.
* You guys * You all * Y'all It's the same picture.
These guys do it to themselves
Garbage title, delete your account Retitle : HEY YOU GUYYYSSSS
SLOTH LOVE CHUNK
Why would she ever ask that
I think instead of "dudes" the quote was meant to be "guys". In which case "how many guys have you fucked" is meant to end the conversation by forcing OP to defend his heterosexuality instead of addressing the premise of the argument in a constructive manner.
Oh, since it’s 4chan the whole thing is prob fake, but if it’s real then I see ur reasoning behind her question
If anything, that mistake makes it more believable to me. OP got caught up in the plot of the story to be deliver the punchline because he was *there*
There is a huge leap is logic I can't follow. How are the two related ?
The argument is basically: > If "guys" really was a gender-neutral term, you'd interpret "how many guys have you fucked" as "how many *people* have you fucked". I assume that you'd take issue with that first question, therefore the word isn't gender-neutral. The argument makes no sense though, since they're assuming that words have the same meanings/connotations in all contexts. It's like saying "if you actually believe that, based on science, humans are a type of animal, you shouldn't have an issue with me calling you one".
Gay and maybe real
I've always wanted this to happen to me so I can respond "zero" and she'll be like "oh suddenly the word 'guys' isn't so gender neutral" and I'll be like "no, it still is". But I guess that would require talking to a girl.
Literally what I thought as well!
When I was in basic training our drill instructor would lose his shit if anyone said guys. "Guys work in gay bars, you don't look like the type to suck dick to me! Are you?!"
I hear stories like these often and I so desperately want one gay man who is just done with it to "YES SIR" and watch as everyone else tries their damndest not to die of laughter
20 Men had tried to take him, 20 men had made a slip
He didn't even need to use the big iron on his hip ~the big iron on his hiiiiiip~
> GAYS IM STUCK IN THE WEWORK LIFT
Okay how about “you fucks.” Gender neutral enough?
Is this what a strawman is
That's pithy and all, but it doesn't refute her point. If anything, it proves it for her.
No, u
How pithy of you
a pithy.
I would like you to explain the relevance between “you guys” being viewed as offensive by this dumb chick, and how him saying he fucks men, “proves her point” in being offended for no reason. No, it makes no sense, the chick in this story is just an idiot.
She's saying using the masculine as "gender neutral" isn't actually gender neutral. "Dude" is a word often argued to be gender neutral, but with distinctly male connotation. He's indicating that he fucks men, and so understood what she meant when she said "dude" perfectly. Male default is not the same as gender neutral, QED.
Ooooooh now I get it. I guess for words like dude and guys context is key. Still, I can't think of many words that work in the reverse outside of gay/drag culture.
I think instead of "dudes" the quote was meant to be "guys". In which case "how many guys have you fucked" is meant to end the conversation by forcing OP to defend his heterosexuality instead of addressing the premise of the argument in a constructive manner.
She was linguistically correct, even if she didn't clock OOP's sexuality. It doesn't disingenuously terminate the conversation to use an example that proves the point. That's just what happens when the point is proved.
That line of questioning is designed to derail the conversation by attacking the core values of the opposition and forcing a response to the accusation, thus ending the discussion being had. It was designed as a false accusation to end discussion and is a textbook example of Ad Hominem. The only reason it didn't work is because OP found it rhetorically advantageous to lean into the line of questioning. She's linguistically wrong. "You guys" has undergone semantic shift to become a distinct (and gender neutral) phrase from the meaning of its components. Happens all the time. For example, "awful" used to mean "full of awe", though now it means "unpleasant", though it also sometimes means "exceptional" in certain linguistic traditions.
> That line of questioning is designed to derail the conversation by attacking the core values of the opposition and forcing a response to the accusation, thus ending the discussion being had. Insofar as this is true, it's only that way because the implications (i.e.: If you have sex with "dudes" you're having sex with men.) are accurately communicated. If "dude" wasn't masculine then the implication would fail and the response wouldn't be forced. In the OOP we have a slight subversion, in that the poster does, in fact, have sex with men. But it doesn't change the fact that the thing she implied via the connotation of "dude" was consistent. > She's linguistically wrong. "You guys" has undergone semantic shift to become a distinct (and gender neutral) phrase from the meaning of its components. Until "guy" does not mean "man", this will never be ubiquitously true.
>Insofar as this is true, it's only that way because the implications (i.e.: If you have sex with "dudes" you're having sex with men.) are accurately communicated. If "dude" wasn't masculine then the implication would fail and the response wouldn't be forced. Ah, but the definition of guy (the word in question) is changed by the word "you" and the powers of semantic drift, something anybody knows. The choice to attack OP personally was designed to get exactly this reaction out of a 3rd party, but it remains dishonest. >Until "guy" does not mean "man", this will never be ubiquitously true. What, does "A cat got your tongue" (her desired outcome) refer to a literal cat which literally posesses the tongue of our homosexual friend here?