Yes Facebook is a dumpster fire, but this is always interesting if you are on there.
-
But you've never explained why that is. You just... kinda like it that way. Their normal takes precedence (it didn't for a bit, but I called you out on it and now it does again) only because you say so. No definition you put forward included whose normal goes first when two normals happen at once.
To be clear, normal doesn't work like that, it's not what I meant and you fully understand this. But if we play by your definition, nothing in your definition decides which normal is the more normal. I say my normal goes because I'm the speaker and my set of expectations define normalcy in my speech. You have provided no argument against this.
wrote last edited by [email protected]It's just the definition of the word. What is typical etc. for some context. Those people consider it normal to do that because to them it is normal
‍
️For example if these people would be from Finland then yes it would be normal. It is just what people in Finland do which makes it normal.
-
It unexpectedly happened to me recently, and I didn't mean to follow the gossip so much as I was surprised, and I discovered the husband had put up a video of the wife cheating on him that he had hired a private investigator to follow. That is very much not nice, but also cheating is crappy. Last person I expected it from would be her.
So…did you goon?
-
It's just the definition of the word. What is typical etc. for some context. Those people consider it normal to do that because to them it is normal
‍️For example if these people would be from Finland then yes it would be normal. It is just what people in Finland do which makes it normal.
Not by your definition. By your definition it's "what's expected or usual", it doesn't say anything about who decides what is expected or usual.
-
Not by your definition. By your definition it's "what's expected or usual", it doesn't say anything about who decides what is expected or usual.
It's not my definition, friend. It's straight from a dictionary. But I think it (pretty reasonably) assumes the person reading it knows it's context dependent. See their example:
the condition of being normal; the state of being usual, typical, or expected.
"the office gradually returned to a semblance of normality"
Of course the context here is how that office typically is. That's the normal.
-
It's not my definition, friend. It's straight from a dictionary. But I think it (pretty reasonably) assumes the person reading it knows it's context dependent. See their example:
the condition of being normal; the state of being usual, typical, or expected.
"the office gradually returned to a semblance of normality"
Of course the context here is how that office typically is. That's the normal.
In that context it's the speaker who has an expectation for what is normal for that office. The office normal and the speaker normal are the same.
There is nothing in the definition that demands normalcy to be defined by the object.
If every language on the planet put the verb at the end of a sentence and only one language set the verb in the middle of the sentence would you say it is incorrect to say speakers of that language are doing things the normal way or would you get nitpicky about it and say that's inaccurate?
Which, again, not the point, you get what I was saying, you're mostly trolling. I get it, you get it, we established this at the go. We're just trolling around the relative inaccuracy of the trolling here.
-
In that context it's the speaker who has an expectation for what is normal for that office. The office normal and the speaker normal are the same.
There is nothing in the definition that demands normalcy to be defined by the object.
If every language on the planet put the verb at the end of a sentence and only one language set the verb in the middle of the sentence would you say it is incorrect to say speakers of that language are doing things the normal way or would you get nitpicky about it and say that's inaccurate?
Which, again, not the point, you get what I was saying, you're mostly trolling. I get it, you get it, we established this at the go. We're just trolling around the relative inaccuracy of the trolling here.
wrote last edited by [email protected]It's just that what's normal is defined by the actual situation in the office. So the office normalcy is just what's normal in the office, even if we think it's abnormal or disagree with their office whatever.
If every language on the planet put the verb at the end of a sentence and only one language set the verb in the middle of the sentence would you say it is incorrect to say speakers of that language are doing things the normal way or would you get nitpicky about it and say that's inaccurate?
I mean if I was talking about how speakers of the verb in the middle language consider it normal then in that context yeah that's their normal.
Did that help to understand the situation? You can ask about other scenarios too if it helps
-
Since when do random low quality social media posts qualify as "meme"?-_-
90% of "memes" nowadays aren't memes.
-
It's just that what's normal is defined by the actual situation in the office. So the office normalcy is just what's normal in the office, even if we think it's abnormal or disagree with their office whatever.
If every language on the planet put the verb at the end of a sentence and only one language set the verb in the middle of the sentence would you say it is incorrect to say speakers of that language are doing things the normal way or would you get nitpicky about it and say that's inaccurate?
I mean if I was talking about how speakers of the verb in the middle language consider it normal then in that context yeah that's their normal.
Did that help to understand the situation? You can ask about other scenarios too if it helps
But I didn't ask if you would say it's "their normal". I asked if you would say it's "normal". Not qualifiers, no possessives. Also, I wasn't talking about how women being socially expected to alter their identity based on having sex with a man as a habit "consider it normal", I was talking about how I don't consider it normal.
So that's kind of a lot of sneaky adjustments you made there. Wanna try that again?
-
But I didn't ask if you would say it's "their normal". I asked if you would say it's "normal". Not qualifiers, no possessives. Also, I wasn't talking about how women being socially expected to alter their identity based on having sex with a man as a habit "consider it normal", I was talking about how I don't consider it normal.
So that's kind of a lot of sneaky adjustments you made there. Wanna try that again?
wrote last edited by [email protected]But it's them we are talking about. Same as your original comment. Otherwise it wouldn't be the same scenario. For the people in question it's normal yes.
I was talking about how I don't consider it normal.
I know. It's normal but you don't find it normal. I feel like we've covered this before, but it has been a long conversation so I'm not 100% sure.
I noticed in some of the replies you seem a bit upset. I hope this conversation isn't the cause of that. I know it's been a long and probably frustrating journey.
-
But it's them we are talking about. Same as your original comment. Otherwise it wouldn't be the same scenario. For the people in question it's normal yes.
I was talking about how I don't consider it normal.
I know. It's normal but you don't find it normal. I feel like we've covered this before, but it has been a long conversation so I'm not 100% sure.
I noticed in some of the replies you seem a bit upset. I hope this conversation isn't the cause of that. I know it's been a long and probably frustrating journey.
No, we are not talking about them. I said "they think it's normal, but it's not normal". That's not what you say it is.
See? Now the fact that you're misrepresenting the conversation for trolling purposes becomes a problem, because we have to talk about what I was actually saying, so the whole thing falls apart.
-
No, we are not talking about them. I said "they think it's normal, but it's not normal". That's not what you say it is.
See? Now the fact that you're misrepresenting the conversation for trolling purposes becomes a problem, because we have to talk about what I was actually saying, so the whole thing falls apart.
No, we are not talking about them.
I said “they think it’s normal, but it’s not normal”.
I'm confused. It does seem like you're referring to some third party in your comment ("they")
-
Please don't tell me to get off of it, I have old Livejournal friends to keep in touch with and that's why I'm there.
Get off of it
-
No, we are not talking about them.
I said “they think it’s normal, but it’s not normal”.
I'm confused. It does seem like you're referring to some third party in your comment ("they")
You are confused. In theory, for the purposes of this conversation in the way it's being carried out.
The key to your confusion would be apparently lacking an understanding of the word "but" and how it works in a sentence, though, which may be a bridge too far.
-
Since when do random low quality social media posts qualify as "meme"?-_-
A meme is a "self-propagating" unit of culture.
OP saw this and was compelled to share it. It's culturally relevant, as it speaks (perhaps satirically, perhaps seriously) about an aspect of human (more specifically: western online) culture.
It's a meme. I don't like it any more than you do but it IS definitionally a meme.
-
You are confused. In theory, for the purposes of this conversation in the way it's being carried out.
The key to your confusion would be apparently lacking an understanding of the word "but" and how it works in a sentence, though, which may be a bridge too far.
I just thought you were referring to some third party and saying how their normal isn't normal, even though it's normal for them
-
I just thought you were referring to some third party and saying how their normal isn't normal, even though it's normal for them
That's exactly what I was saying. Which is not the same as what you've been implying I was saying but is the same as what I was saying I was saying earlier.
Hopefully that clarifies it.
-
That's exactly what I was saying. Which is not the same as what you've been implying I was saying but is the same as what I was saying I was saying earlier.
Hopefully that clarifies it.
Which is not the same as what you’ve been implying I was saying but is the same as what I was saying I was saying earlier.
I'm confused on what you thought I was implying. The point has always been the same afaik
You
I can’t believe how much of the world just… goes with it and thinks it’s normal. It’s definitely not normal. Just some serious psychosexual patriarchy mindfuck going on for so many people.
Me
It’s normal because it’s what most do. That’s what normality is
Typical and even expected in a lot of places. There it would be considered normal
It’s normal in those places because it’s usual, typical or expected. If it’s not those things where you live, it’s not normal where you live. It’s not any harder than that.
I was maybe too optimistic with that last line.
-
Which is not the same as what you’ve been implying I was saying but is the same as what I was saying I was saying earlier.
I'm confused on what you thought I was implying. The point has always been the same afaik
You
I can’t believe how much of the world just… goes with it and thinks it’s normal. It’s definitely not normal. Just some serious psychosexual patriarchy mindfuck going on for so many people.
Me
It’s normal because it’s what most do. That’s what normality is
Typical and even expected in a lot of places. There it would be considered normal
It’s normal in those places because it’s usual, typical or expected. If it’s not those things where you live, it’s not normal where you live. It’s not any harder than that.
I was maybe too optimistic with that last line.
Oh, cool, this is the easy part of these dumb things where we get to just copy paste the original conversation and go down the loop. Hold on:
You added "a lot of places". It's not typical or expected here, so it's not normal here.
So "normalcy" on this is geographically bound. So is it normal if my normal and your normal are different and the Internet is making us rub our normals together?
Told you it was a waste of time.
-
Oh, cool, this is the easy part of these dumb things where we get to just copy paste the original conversation and go down the loop. Hold on:
You added "a lot of places". It's not typical or expected here, so it's not normal here.
So "normalcy" on this is geographically bound. So is it normal if my normal and your normal are different and the Internet is making us rub our normals together?
Told you it was a waste of time.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I wouldn't call it stupid, you were under the assumption that I implied something different or changed it during the conversation so I just showed what I was saying right at the start to show that it's been the same.
You added “a lot of places”. It’s not typical or expected here, so it’s not normal here.
You always need context to describe normalcy.
So “normalcy” on this is geographically bound. So is it normal if my normal and your normal are different and the Internet is making us rub our normals together?
Geography is one context, but it's more about societal norms in this case, which don't strictly follow geographical bounds. So yes and no. In this case if the people in question live in a place where it's typical or expected, it's normal.
-
I wouldn't call it stupid, you were under the assumption that I implied something different or changed it during the conversation so I just showed what I was saying right at the start to show that it's been the same.
You added “a lot of places”. It’s not typical or expected here, so it’s not normal here.
You always need context to describe normalcy.
So “normalcy” on this is geographically bound. So is it normal if my normal and your normal are different and the Internet is making us rub our normals together?
Geography is one context, but it's more about societal norms in this case, which don't strictly follow geographical bounds. So yes and no. In this case if the people in question live in a place where it's typical or expected, it's normal.
You have context to define normalcy. I'm the speaker and I'm from a place where it's not normal, so it's not normal.
But of course that's not the point and has never been, because the line isn't about whether the practice is standard in some regions, which it obviously is, it's about whether it makes sense to the general principles of general mores on gender for modern society, which it doesn't.
Which you understand fully and always have. Because this is one of these dumb ones, so we're now on loop two.
Man, social media sucks and is so not normal.
