Comment on Anon studies human behavior

• boletus@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Well if you want an answer to the question it’s purely the way it comes off. A lot of women I know get the ick when people use the word female in that context.

  source

  • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    A lot of women I know get the ick

    And a lot don’t. Icks aren’t valid reasons & can be unjustified.

    We all can read context as written without free associating extra assumptions. The context doesn’t indicate offensive use of females.

    If you read what someone wrote, twist it into something else, & judge them for it, that is unjustified. What good does it promote?

    More broadly

    if you want an answer

    wasn’t given. As stated before

    Regardless of motive, the act is the same: indiscriminately picking problems over females. If everyone did that, females would be generally accepted as a dirty, toxic word.

    The question remains: what good is advanced by treating females like a dirty, toxic word?

    source

    • boletus@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      None at all, and the real argument wasn’t that females is a dirty toxic word. It’s the context in which it is used.

      source

      • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        The context in OP where females was used inoffensively?

        You haven’t pinned down the problem with the context of the word: I don’t think you can. All I think you have are opinions & assumptions unsupported by context.

        Either the context or the word has a problem. If it’s not the context, then it’s the word, which means we’re really arguing about treating females as a dirty, toxic word.

        If it is the context, then you can identify that problem (in a way that clearly sets it apart from inoffensive uses of the noun female): it’s puzzling no one has so far.

        source

        • -> View More Comments