Yes Facebook is a dumpster fire, but this is always interesting if you are on there.
-
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.
-
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.
If you were talking about the other people the context would be their surroundings.
-
If you were talking about the other people the context would be their surroundings.
Oh, we're back to copy pasting and out of the "calling out the real conversation that's happening" tangent? Cool.
I mean, if you take your definition of normal, surely the person speaking determines what's normal, right? That's not a good thing, because your working definition of normalcy is bad and nonsensical and only determined by your desire to antagonize somebody online on a nitpick, so you probably don't like it much yourself beyond that. But if we take it, then I get to say what's normal when I speak because normal is "the state of being usual, typical, or expected" and I'm the one having the expectations here.
The surroundings are my surroundings because it is my post.
-
Oh, we're back to copy pasting and out of the "calling out the real conversation that's happening" tangent? Cool.
I mean, if you take your definition of normal, surely the person speaking determines what's normal, right? That's not a good thing, because your working definition of normalcy is bad and nonsensical and only determined by your desire to antagonize somebody online on a nitpick, so you probably don't like it much yourself beyond that. But if we take it, then I get to say what's normal when I speak because normal is "the state of being usual, typical, or expected" and I'm the one having the expectations here.
The surroundings are my surroundings because it is my post.
wrote last edited by [email protected]No the person speaking doesn't determine it when speaking about other people. You can't decide normalcy for someone else.
-
No the person speaking doesn't determine it when speaking about other people. You can't decide normalcy for someone else.
That is literally what you do every time you use the word, unless you add "for them" afterwards or you're talking about yourself.
I was going to bring in another copypasta here, but this one is so obviously wrong I kinda need to call it fresh.
-
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.
-
That is literally what you do every time you use the word, unless you add "for them" afterwards or you're talking about yourself.
I was going to bring in another copypasta here, but this one is so obviously wrong I kinda need to call it fresh.
wrote last edited by [email protected]When you're talking about other people you sorta don't need to keep repeating the fact. And you were talking about some third party ("they").
And no, you can't just decide what's normal to someone else. I can't decide it's not normal to go to sauna in Finland, even if I so furiously disagreed with that.
-
So…did you goon?
I am too old to understand this reference..
-
I am too old to understand this reference..
Did you watch it?
