unrequited
Junior Member
Tormentor of the Heart, close friend of the Spleen
Posts: 74
|
Post by unrequited on Mar 3, 2014 15:54:54 GMT
There is a corner of the interner that I really, really dislike. The hugbox side where all opinions that aren't the feel-good you're okay sort get shunned. They breed people who take all things that aren't Politically Correct as offensive and attack those who do things or say things heterodox to their own beliefs. This is one of these occurances. Tom doesn't deserve a million tumblrite social justice warriors descending on him like a rabid flock of shrieking harpies. If they don't like his joke, they can ignore it and move on like a normal person would.
|
|
Sal
New Member
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
Posts: 31
|
Post by Sal on Mar 3, 2014 15:57:50 GMT
Bottom line, this is a non-issue. Agreed. If anyone actually stops reading because of this (which I very much doubt), then we can conclude that nothing of value was lost.
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 3, 2014 16:46:05 GMT
Okay. I don't understand anything about twitter and cannot see much of those other tweets. But, if I understood right, Tom did one little thing he is right to regret: however much people were wrong to get offended from Tom's rather innocent tweet, re-tweeting their posts, especially when you have as many followers as I assume Tom to have (point: Tom might not have as many followers as I assume Tom to have, these are two different things), and when quite a few of them apparently were transgender and thus quite easily object to harassment, sounds to me like something that might not be well thought out thing to do.
I'm not sure about the concept of retweeting, but apparently it serves to make a tweet more popular, so I can well understand if some of them had quite awful time after it. They can partially blame themselves, of course, because nobody told them to go and shout out loud that they are transgender or whatever whenever some mentions chick with dick. It just happens that when you get so easily offended and are very verbal about why, you may actually end up being offended by someone else. They were oversensitive, but Tom, for a little while, was perhaps not sensitive enough - I mean, if he retweeted their posts and if it means what I think it means.
There's a whole a lot of "if" here, since this really is like another world to me.
'zims out.
|
|
|
Post by Stately Buff Cookie on Mar 3, 2014 17:15:36 GMT
I am part of the trans community, and I feel Tom is fully in his rights to tell those people to go fuck themselves.
What is the absolute and utter garbage? People like this aren't even really part of the trans community. They're shitty teenagers having a typical teenager identity crisis. Tumblr, and similar online communities, have allured them to the idea that being trans is HIP and COOL and IN. They can be DIFFERENT from EVERYONE ELSE in an exciting new way. Then they lord their feeling of moral superiority for "bucking the system" over everyone they see. Evidence? These kinds of people will tell you, with a straight face, that being trans doesn't mean you have to suffer dysphoria. Being trans isn't some new trend that popped up recently for their amusement. It's a medical condition that has had research spanning decades before the internet was piss in Al Gore's eye. It has legally binding methods of treatment and diagnosis. There's a big old book, a legal medical document, full of what it is, what it means, and how one is legally to treat someone suffering from it.
But nah, let me go tell everyone I'm trans cause I'm bored of being who I am. It's not like real transpeople just want to live a normal life under the radar like every other normal person. Certainly you aren't just being a jackass calling attention and giving a bad name to people who just want to be left alone.
Do I sound mad? Damn right I'm mad. Tom is a good guy, and these asshole SJW types have bullied yet another good person out of social circles they had no right to challenge.
|
|
|
Post by crater on Mar 3, 2014 17:25:34 GMT
This is all on me. I should not have said or done anything, and being drunk was no excuse. I will be severely reducing my online interactions from now on. The comic will continue to update as usual. dude, don't let those jerks get you down. you made a comment on dick-girl comics. It wasn't a referendum on transgender society. The people who took it that way have their own agenda that doesn't involve your best interests, or Gunnerkrigg court. They just used you and twitter for their own means.
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 3, 2014 17:32:28 GMT
I am part of the trans community, and I feel Tom is fully in his rights to tell those people to go fuck themselves. What is the absolute and utter garbage? People like this aren't even really part of the trans community. They're shitty teenagers having a typical teenager identity crisis. Tumblr, and similar online communities, have allured them to the idea that being trans is HIP and COOL and IN. They can be DIFFERENT from EVERYONE ELSE in an exciting new way. Then they lord their feeling of moral superiority for "bucking the system" over everyone they see. Evidence? These kinds of people will tell you, with a straight face, that being trans doesn't mean you have to suffer dysphoria. Being trans isn't some new trend that popped up recently for their amusement. It's a medical condition that has had research spanning decades before the internet was piss in Al Gore's eye. It has legally binding methods of treatment and diagnosis. There's a big old book, a legal medical document, full of what it is, what it means, and how one is legally to treat someone suffering from it. But nah, let me go tell everyone I'm trans cause I'm bored of being who I am. It's not like real transpeople just want to live a normal life under the radar like every other normal person. Certainly you aren't just being a jackass calling attention and giving a bad name to people who just want to be left alone. Do I sound mad? Damn right I'm mad. Tom is a good guy, and these asshole SJW types have bullied yet another good person out of social circles they had no right to challenge. Okay. Maybe so, but I saw some tweets from someone who said she is a girl who happens to have a penis. Sooo.... unless she lies, I'd say she is pretty transgender and vulnerable to harassment after that comment. Does it give her right to go mad at Tom for that little sarcastic joke? No. Is it her own fault that she tweets that she has a dick? Yes. But is retweeting that to thousands of people thoughtless? Oh yeah, it is. Is it even a little bit douchy? Maybe. Disclaimer: I still am fully of opinion that this was not Tom's fault, but oversensitive and over "politically correct" people made much out of nothing and it was all just a big time non-event and that's it. But I can see that this one part of happenings was regrettable from Tom's part. And that said, there are real problems in the world. Like in Ukraine right now. People should stop thinking about their petty little feelings for a while and focus on that real shit that is going on.
|
|
|
Post by Covalent on Mar 3, 2014 18:14:04 GMT
I noticed some people mentioned Ukraine, and think that in a day this won't matter anyway because we'll all be dead.. I don't see how a nuclear war ISN'T going to happen.
That's not to say one WILL happen, but I feel like these rapid escalations are getting out of control, and the ultimatum tonight seems to seal it.. I can't really put my fears to rest.
|
|
|
Post by aaroncampbell on Mar 3, 2014 18:30:51 GMT
Yes, I found this to be entirely out of line. This is all on me. I should not have said or done anything, and being drunk was no excuse. Of course people are upset -- Mort is a beloved character! "Killing" him off is a terrible decision, and having a little too much to drink is no excuse. I don't know how you're going to recover the story from this...but if anyone can, you can! I will be severely reducing my online interactions from now on. The comic will continue to update as usual. Joking aside, I'm sorry to hear this. Everyone slips up, and one thing the Internet is unfortunately good at is allowing people to pseudonymously point out mistakes and rant about them. I can understand you feeling forced into withdrawing from that sort of public social interaction. On the other hand, the same technology that allows you to share slip-ups also lets you share your incredible stories and artwork with so many people, and also creates things like this community! In any event, I understand your decision to step out of the limelight is not permanent, and more importantly I hope this experience doesn't bleed into your storytelling! You've got many, many fans who have read Gunnerkrigg Court for years, and deeply enjoy your characterisation, narration, artwork, humour, and especially the daily community that has built up around the story. It's more than just "a comic", at least to me. It's a great book that I'm reading at the same time as a bunch of friends! None of us can read ahead so we get together every few days to talk about what's going on and theorize. I guess it's what a book club is like though I've never been part of one. I really like it, whatever you want to call it. I don't know whether you read the forums or not (many of us suspect you do, and I hope so because there's lots of interesting and funny stuff) but it's nice to hear from you whenever you drop in. Please come by as often as you feel comfortable, even/especially when it's not for anything important. And thanks again for the wonderful story! P.S. I realized after re-reading what I wrote that many of you may try to interpret what I wrote as some sort of stance on the original issue. Please don't; there isn't an opinion here, and there aren't any lines to read between. I understand and agree with Tom, as I've said and done things that I wish I could take back -- sometimes sober, sometimes not, sometimes because they actually reflected my true feelings and opinions and sometimes because they were only ill-formed thoughts of the moment. I don't know which these were of Tom's, I don't care, and it doesn't matter. As far as I'm concerned, this is already a forgotten issue; too much noise has been made about it already.
|
|
|
Post by csj on Mar 3, 2014 18:38:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 3, 2014 18:46:58 GMT
I noticed some people mentioned Ukraine, and think that in a day this won't matter anyway because we'll all be dead.. I don't see how a nuclear war ISN'T going to happen. That's not to say one WILL happen, but I feel like these rapid escalations are getting out of control, and the ultimatum tonight seems to seal it.. I can't really put my fears to rest. Well, let's just say, it seems that the people in Ukraine are going be dead sooner than us who are not there unless something is done. I think this is one of those occasions where the way to avoid this escalating any further would be to mobilize.
|
|
|
Post by eyemyself on Mar 3, 2014 19:04:32 GMT
I noticed some people mentioned Ukraine, and think that in a day this won't matter anyway because we'll all be dead.. I don't see how a nuclear war ISN'T going to happen. That's not to say one WILL happen, but I feel like these rapid escalations are getting out of control, and the ultimatum tonight seems to seal it.. I can't really put my fears to rest. Well, let's just say, it seems that the people in Ukraine are going be dead sooner than us who are not there unless something is done. I think this is one of those occasions where the way to avoid this escalating any further would be to mobilize. I too have fears over Ukraine. I remember when the Berlin Wall came down and tensions between the U.S. and Russia began to become a workable relationship. I was very young. I remember my dad telling me about growing up with air-raid response drills in school and how much anxiety that caused him. I never anticipated that we might return to a time of open hostility with Russia. These are scary times we live in.
|
|
eskhn
Full Member
You like 'em? Huh? You like 'em?
Posts: 167
|
Post by eskhn on Mar 3, 2014 19:20:05 GMT
Ukraine? Seriously? The UN won't get involved. They'll just point fingers and use sanctions. It's the 21st century, nobody would be stupid enough to go to nuclear war over a country they're minimally invested in.
As for Tom, this is just another case of the internet getting its collective panties in a bunch over how other people might be offended. Oh no, I said panties, better go back and edit that.
|
|
|
Post by thedoomblahsong on Mar 3, 2014 19:26:18 GMT
When I first read it I was very confused about Tom's tweet. After reading what other people on the forum say, I think I get it, and don't see any way in which it can be construed as "cissexist". The tweet is sarcastically mocking the way the token female character in a hollywood action film always has to be the biggest BAMF ever to show everyone how non-sexist the writers were. (e.g. Hit-Girl from Kick-ass, and Private Vasquez from Aliens). The tweet does not refer to transgender people nor disparage them. Tom does say that if such a character "had a dick, it would be larger than the person she was talking to". This choice of analogy does not reflect Tom's own views, it refers to a quote from Man of Steel in his previous tweet, and also *SARCASM STILL IN EFFECT*. The subject of the tweet is movie characters who do not have penises. Discussing a hypothetical in which they did have penises hasn't got anything to do with trans women. Interpreting this as a hateful joke about trans women is simply invalid IMO.
However, I could not have understood this without reading this thread. I haven't seen Man of Steel, and I didn't know at first that the previous tweet was a quote from that movie. @tom, I don't think what there's anything wrong with what you said, but you WERE being rather unclear. Rather than apologize, you should explain what you meant. I think that will calm a lot of people down, and anyone who does not calm down is not worth the trouble anyway.
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Mar 3, 2014 19:45:11 GMT
I noticed some people mentioned Ukraine, and think that in a day this won't matter anyway because we'll all be dead.. I don't see how a nuclear war ISN'T going to happen. That's not to say one WILL happen, but I feel like these rapid escalations are getting out of control, and the ultimatum tonight seems to seal it.. I can't really put my fears to rest. Fear not. Geopolitics are mostly bluster. Crimea does not belong to the Russians, and the presence of their troops in the territory is a violation of Ukranian sovereignty. At the same time, there is almost nothing the EU or the US can do. A majority of the population of Crimea is ethnic Russians who welcome Russian troops. This does not make Putin's move legal, or his claim that Euromaidan and other pro-EU people are harming Crimean Russians true, but it does greatly reduce the number of things Ukraine can do about it. Ukraine relies heavily on Russia for oil and natural gas, and if it should lead to war then we would see a repeat of what happened in Georgia in 2008. If you notice, Russian troops are still occupying South Ossetia and the other breakaway territory, in violation of international law, and yet nobody brought THAT up at Sochi. In the end the West will do nothing because there is nothing they can do. So, don't panic. No nukes. Probably not even a war. Just Russia humiliating a former satellite state.
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 3, 2014 20:10:32 GMT
Ukraine? Seriously? The UN won't get involved. They'll just point fingers and use sanctions. It's the 21st century, nobody would be stupid enough to go to nuclear war over a country they're minimally invested in. UN won't, and apparently no country will either. The leaders of the west completely fail to see the stakes here and people are so blinded by all this discoursive and symbolic crap here that they can't understand real, material power, and that is what Putin is thinking there. He is not there to show that he's got some power. He is there because Ukraine is important to his plans and he is about to lose it because the people of Ukraine finally got absolutely fed up with their corrupt leaders and fought their way to Europe. And now Europe is abandoning them and doing nothing more than wearing yellow-and-blue ties as if it would help anything. Point is, further tragedy is still avoidable, if states like UK, France and Germany mobilize. Russia won't go to a war with west, not yet. But if we once again show that we are cowards who will not do anything, they will continue to this until they can fight the west. I wouldn't like to refer back to WWII, but I have to. Think about it. Okay, I stop this rant here and won't continue it. Too much said already, it is all too off topic and I never meant that we should discuss it here, just that before people get so bloody hurt with their little feelings they should think about some real problems out there.
|
|
|
Post by Deepbluediver on Mar 3, 2014 20:18:42 GMT
Where the pages the links linked to taken down? Or is this just temporary? They don't seem to be working for me. Either way, I'm curious (curiosity is probably my biggest weakness). This is all on me. I should not have said or done anything, and being drunk was no excuse. I will be severely reducing my online interactions from now on. The comic will continue to update as usual. While I'm sure this whole incident has not been fun...but I don't really see that as the proper reaction. If you said something and people disagreed with it, then you talk it out with them. If you said something and people misunderstood or took it out of context, same solution. If you said something that you later regret, you can apologize and promise to do better next time. But this feels kind of like running away and hiding. Personally, I've never been a fan of twitter. Anything worth saying I can't squeeze into 140 characters*, and the only other possible purpose to constantly letting the world know where you are or what you are doing is to lure your crazed-stalker into some kind of Saw-esque trap. * I happen to be particularly verbose when writting, but I think the point still stands.
|
|
|
Post by warrl on Mar 3, 2014 20:28:57 GMT
This is all on me. I should not have said or done anything, and being drunk was no excuse. I will be severely reducing my online interactions from now on. The comic will continue to update as usual. Tom, there are people who are so consistently offended one would think they are being paid a good wage to do so. And mostly they are offended on behalf of other people without asking those other people whether THEY are offended or not (and there is no worse sin than saying something is funny, harmless, or inconsequential when the professionally-offended-on-behalf-of-other-people decide that you are offended by it). Please do not let these people control you.
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 3, 2014 20:33:45 GMT
This is all on me. I should not have said or done anything, and being drunk was no excuse. I will be severely reducing my online interactions from now on. The comic will continue to update as usual. While I'm sure this whole incident has not been fun...but I don't really see that as the proper reaction. If you said something and people disagreed with it, then you talk it out with them. I know that optimally it is so. In principle, you are right. But you fail to notice that this takes place in the world of Internet's so called social media. There is no rational discussion with lynching parties. If he managed to stop that attack by apologizing, that is the solution. When "discussion" is hateful and irrational mass-hysteria, then best you can do is to silence it.
|
|
|
Post by zimmyzims on Mar 3, 2014 20:52:19 GMT
I noticed some people mentioned Ukraine, and think that in a day this won't matter anyway because we'll all be dead.. I don't see how a nuclear war ISN'T going to happen. That's not to say one WILL happen, but I feel like these rapid escalations are getting out of control, and the ultimatum tonight seems to seal it.. I can't really put my fears to rest. Fear not. [...] So, don't panic. No nukes. Probably not even a war. Just Russia humiliating a former satellite state. "Fear not"? Fear not? That's exactly what I fear will happen. I'm not biggest fan of Tymoschenko (mind spelling), but she is spot on about the issue here: Link to interview.Sorry, you were probably just sarcastic or something, but this is a serious issue and I can't laugh to it. But I promise to stop fuming about it here.
|
|
|
Post by Deepbluediver on Mar 3, 2014 20:54:40 GMT
While I'm sure this whole incident has not been fun...but I don't really see that as the proper reaction. If you said something and people disagreed with it, then you talk it out with them. I know that optimally it is so. In principle, you are right. But you fail to notice that this takes place in the world of Internet's so called social media. There is no rational discussion with lynching parties. If he managed to stop that attack by apologizing, that is the solution. When "discussion" is hateful and irrational mass-hysteria, then best you can do is to silence it. Point taken. But the stubborn, irrational lunatic inside me says "if you back down from a fight you are letting them win". None of the options I posted are necessarily exclusive of one another. You could, for instance, say "The way in which I expressed my message was improper and insulting, and for that I apologize, but I still agree with the point I was trying to get across, which I have explained here in the following points: ...etc etc etc". Maybe you can't fit all that on Twitter, which is part of the reason I already said I never liked it in the first place- it can't provide the proper context to put things in. But rather than "severely reducing [his] online interactions", it just means he should spend more time hanging out here in the forums, with us.
|
|
|
Post by sniperserpent on Mar 3, 2014 21:16:45 GMT
Okay, I don't think many people here actually understand why the tweet tasted sour to a lot of people. It was a simple and easy to make slip up, sure. I, being someone who was a little rubbed the wrong way by it, fully accept Tom's apolagy, as it's pretty obvious the actual hurtful implication was not at all intended. The fact is it can be pretty easy to be annoyed by people acting like something you identify as doesn't exist. And if you are a girl with a dick, the "If girls with dicks" humour kind of does that. So it wasn't meant to be hurtful, but its not unreasonable to be a little peeved at it.
|
|
|
Post by Covalent on Mar 3, 2014 21:34:06 GMT
I shouldn't be so paranoid, but I don't want to die... Maybe I'll spend tonight in a basement somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Mar 3, 2014 21:34:38 GMT
Sorry, you were probably just sarcastic or something, but this is a serious issue and I can't laugh to it. But I promise to stop fuming about it here. "when Russia is allowed to take away Crimea, then the world will change and then not only politics and life in Ukraine will change. The politics and life will change practically everywhere in the world, and then we have to accept to states that in 21st century, one country, an aggressor can violate all the international agreements, take away territories whenever she likes."I must disagree with Yulia on this point. The world isn't changing, it has always worked this way. Going back to the beginning of civilization and the story of the four great rivers, taking something by force is the norm, not the exception. Now, that doesn't mean it's not a shame and we shouldn't work to change it, and that doesn't mean I am not mightily disappointed that Ukraine will probably not be getting any help from the west beyond rhetoric and some light sanctions on Russia, but the fact is that an ideal world where the pen is mightier than the sword is still a long way off and it is not realistic to expect Putin to be cowed by the international community or the UN, when he has already made it plain that he is a realpolitik player and doesn't care what other people have to say unless they can back it up with force. The fact is it can be pretty easy to be annoyed by people acting like something you identify as doesn't exist. And if you are a girl with a dick, the "If girls with dicks" humour kind of does that. So it wasn't meant to be hurtful, but its not unreasonable to be a little peeved at it. He never implied they don't exist. Nobody is trying to "erase" anybody. He was making a joke about the way women protags are represented as overly badass in action movies to somehow compensate for the fact that they are a woman, as if such compensation were needed. That in itself is an accurate observation on stereotypical gender roles. But instead of complementing him on that lucid point, the social justice warrior contingent of the fandom decided that he was somehow trying to make a poke at transgender people, which he wasn't.So actually, it is highly unreasonable to be peeved.
|
|
|
Post by sniperserpent on Mar 3, 2014 21:38:54 GMT
The fact is it can be pretty easy to be annoyed by people acting like something you identify as doesn't exist. And if you are a girl with a dick, the "If girls with dicks" humour kind of does that. So it wasn't meant to be hurtful, but its not unreasonable to be a little peeved at it. He never implied they don't exist. Nobody is trying to "erase" anybody. He was making a joke about the way women protags are represented as overly badass in action movies to somehow compensate for the fact that they are a woman, as if such compensation were needed. That in itself is an accurate observation on stereotypical gender roles. But instead of complementing him on that lucid point, the social justice warrior contingent of the fandom decided that he was somehow trying to make a poke at transgender people, which he wasn't. So actually, it is highly unreasonable to be peeved. I agree that was definitely the attention, at the very least. But there is erasure there. "If she had a dick," is implying, albeit accidentally, females can't have dicks, and as a female with a dick, you can't help but not like that implication.
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Mar 3, 2014 21:44:19 GMT
Okay, I don't think many people here actually understand why the tweet tasted sour to a lot of people. It was a simple and easy to make slip up, sure. I, being someone who was a little rubbed the wrong way by it, fully accept Tom's apolagy, as it's pretty obvious the actual hurtful implication was not at all intended. The fact is it can be pretty easy to be annoyed by people acting like something you identify as doesn't exist. And if you are a girl with a dick, the "If girls with dicks" humour kind of does that. So it wasn't meant to be hurtful, but its not unreasonable to be a little peeved at it. Finally, a member with an appropriate qualification to weigh in. Tom's twoot didn't imply that girls with dicks don't exist though, he was illustrating a trait that this one particular female would posess if she had a penis. That's leagues away from saying they don't exist. It's a crude joke, I'll immediately admit that, and Tom won't be winning any awards for comedy for that twoot. But it doesn't seem inherently offensive to me.
|
|
|
Post by GK Sierra on Mar 3, 2014 21:48:24 GMT
I agree that was definitely the attention, at the very least. But there is erasure there. "If she had a dick," is implying, albeit accidentally, females can't have dicks, and as a female with a dick, you can't help but not like that implication. That is one of the most incredible leaps I have ever seen. The word "if" means "hypothetical scenario" not "hypothetical scenario that is impossible". I think it's highly reasonable for me to be peeved when people use really lame excuses to turn something completely and utterly innocuous into a forum for their charged social debate.
|
|
|
Post by sniperserpent on Mar 3, 2014 21:51:56 GMT
I agree that was definitely the attention, at the very least. But there is erasure there. "If she had a dick," is implying, albeit accidentally, females can't have dicks, and as a female with a dick, you can't help but not like that implication. That is one of the most incredible leaps I have ever seen. The word "if" means "hypothetical scenario" not "hypothetical scenario that is impossible". I think it's highly reasonable for me to be peeved when people use really lame excuses to turn something completely and utterly innocuous into a forum for their charged social debate. If thats one of the most incredible leaps you've ever seen, then I don't know what internet you've been on. I would certainly say that wording leans strongly towards the hypothetical but impossible scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Mar 3, 2014 21:57:59 GMT
That is one of the most incredible leaps I have ever seen. The word "if" means "hypothetical scenario" not "hypothetical scenario that is impossible". I think it's highly reasonable for me to be peeved when people use really lame excuses to turn something completely and utterly innocuous into a forum for their charged social debate. If thats one of the most incredible leaps you've ever seen, then I don't know what internet you've been on. I would certainly say that wording leans strongly towards the hypothetical but impossible scenario. The wording leans towards "Scenario where things happen". Take the phrase "If I owned a car, I would drive over a lot of pedestrians." If you extract any meaning from that phrase, it's that I'm a bad driver. If you manage to work that to mean "18 year-old college students don't have cars", then we need to take a look at your work and try to see where you're coming up with that.
|
|
|
Post by sniperserpent on Mar 3, 2014 22:01:37 GMT
If thats one of the most incredible leaps you've ever seen, then I don't know what internet you've been on. I would certainly say that wording leans strongly towards the hypothetical but impossible scenario. The wording leans towards "Scenario where things happen". Take the phrase "If I owned a car, I would drive over a lot of pedestrians." If you extract any meaning from that phrase, it's that I'm a bad driver. If you manage to work that to mean "18 year-old college students don't have cars", then we need to take a look at your work and try to see where you're coming up with that. I'd say that is only really the case if its in the singular. If I say If I had a car, I'f run over a lot of pedestrians, I wouldn't be saying 18-year old colledge students didn't own cars. If I said if 18 year old colledge students had cars, a lot of pedestrians would be run over, I am implying they currently did not own those cars. Similarly, if I said If Lois lane had a dick - I would not take that as anything as an implicaiton about girls as a whole. If I say if Girls had dicks- then that is a more absolute statement about the gender.
|
|
|
Post by Señor Goose on Mar 3, 2014 22:11:14 GMT
If Lois lane had a dick - I would not take that as anything as an implicaiton about girls as a whole. If I say if Girls had dicks- then that is a more absolute statement about the gender. You're right, there is a slight distinction between using the singular specific and the plural general. I do understand that if Tom had said "If girls had dicks then blah blah..." there would have been a different connotation to his twoot. Not enough to get grade-A butthurt, but a correction from a follower would be in order. But Tom's exact words were "If she had a dick, it would be larger than the person she was talking to!" And I know those are his exact words because I took a screenshot of his twoot, anticipating a shitstorm. This is different for one reason: he used "If she"- the singular specific. Not meant to be taken as an implication about bedicked girls.
|
|