Leaderboard

Very good. Indeed. I myself tend to complain every time a "that" shows up since they can take on far too many meanings. When possible, murder it, otherwise, replace it, if you can't, you're probably using it right.

The sole point of someone becoming offended over a word is wrong enough to start with. Blessed are those, who don't give a damn.

Your brains should implement some more sane space, you beta liberal.

Great post as always Sana-sama

Because fiction has different goals to communication. Fiction has different goals to my group's weekly get together at the pub (which usually involves the underside of a table somewhere amirite :3) Genre fiction is about sucking people in and entertaining people with the story, and calling attention to the writing because it was written haphazardly is against those goals. There have been people who tried writing dialogue exactly how people speak, complete with 'ers' 'umms' and 'ahs', but that was literature, the artsy genre.

Sorry, that's how people around me speak though... Not sure why writing needs to make people who speak sound like they're all writers. It's one of my big bugbears - that people complain about the spoken word by characters not being correct grammar or that it sounds horrible.

Australian here, the original sentence is horrible. Like seriously horrible. I don't even like the sentence it ended up at - "I told you I gave you the unburnt piece of toast, right?" Repetition of 'you' is eyecatching. May be replaced with 'said', with the 'to you' implied: "I said I gave you the unburnt piece of toast, right?" "Didn't I say I gave you the unburnt piece of toast?"

People need to separate the idea of 'insulted' and 'offended'. If I 'insult' someone, that person may feel 'offended', but that doesn't mean if someone is offended that they were insulted. This is because an 'insult' refers to the intent of the offender, whereas being offended refers to the emotions of the offendee. The two words are often mixed together to do away with the pesky idea that some people just go around looking to be offended, and catering to these people is sometimes more trouble than it's worth. There's nothing insulting about using the word 'blinded'. It denotes 'not being able to see', so blinded by fear means not being able to see clearly due to you being such a timid tabby. It's an excellent descriptive word that often has no prejudice behind it. That people are offended by this is only natural, because some people are offended by anything. Case in point, the other day at the supermarket the lady in front of me had such an overpowering body odour that it assaulted my senses. This, I found, was quite offensive and caused me to move to another aisle. Alas, it did not give me the right to spritz her copiously with perfume. And I'm not going to stop calling people stupid when they're being stupid because it offends those with intellectual problems. It's, once again, an excellent descriptive word. The idea of institutionalised ableism is perfectly normal. Countries are about growth and coming out on top in that international competition countries are locked in with each other. The more they win, the more resources they nab for its people. Same deal with businesses. Countries and businesses will look for the best people to carry out certain tasks, certain work, and preference will naturally go to those more able because these people are often able to more effectively carry out these tasks. The up side of this is that society is now in a position to adequately care for the disabled, unlike in the past where they were often killed off for being a drain on resources, and we got to this point partly by being terribly ableist. Society is interested in getting as far away from nature as possible, nature is all about survival of the fittest (because life was harsh and you needed to be tough to survive) and is not a nice place. These days we're cushioned away from real life enough that we can provide for those less fortunate. I regularly use all except for words 3, 11, 12, and 13. However I'm an aspiring writing, and writers are taught not to be too PC in their writing ...

No, it's not. It's a fact. And we need to recognize it in order to help those people.

Guess you haven't heard of words like nigger, spic, chink, cracker, etc. Some words hold actual power over people. Even more so if those words are associated with a history of hate and making others feel like they're less than human.

Well, you shouldn't. First, because I'm not telling you how to conduct, I'm giving an advice so that you can make some people's lives better. Second, because, unless you are disabled, you're benefiting from your privilege within a society with institutionalized ableism. In other words, your situation is a hundred times better than those that are actually suffering.

Nowadays, verbal insults are the most common forms of aggression. Bullying, arguments, humiliation, all those usually come through verbal attacks. Sure, there are people who are less susceptible to it, but I don't know anyone who doesn't care or isn't emotionally affected at all by verbal attacks. If you don't, you are a very lucky person. Too bad other people aren't like you.

Look at it another way, are you completely fine with your girl(s) being banged by other men? I wouldn't be.

Are you familiar with what marriage is about? Marriage is a possessive system invented so men to keep track of their possessions, like wives and any offspring they may bear. It’s part of what makes the concept of ‘marriage’ obsolete. In the olden days polygamy was completely natural, as was monogamy, but it was a possessive system. We're not flooded with the concept of ‘love’ being possible between only 2 people, but rather that marriage is only possible between 2 people. Which is why you see all those stories involving love triangles, cheating, revenge and whatever. If you aren’t counting your partners as possessions, then does it matter if your partner is seeing other people? Adultery is only a thing because of the concept of one partner belonging to another. But monogamy - why did it come about? Many people think it’s because of Christianity, but monogamy was running rampant before this. In Ancient Greece for example. That doesn’t mean Christianity didn’t help this, but it’s suggested the truth lies elsewhere. Think about it a little. If women and their children were treated as possessions who weren’t allowed to take multiple husbands, but men could take multiple wives as possessions, then there’s a pretty obvious limitation isn't there? Some men will be left out in the cold. These men will often leave, meaning a smaller army, meaning less tax revenue. Which results in monogamous cultures, in a world where women were viewed as possessions, being superior militarily and growth wise, or would inevitably prove themselves to be better superior militarily and growth wise. That is, monogamous culture would eventually prove to be the stronger culture. Over time people then came to view this as the norm, and because stronger cultures conquer weaker cultures, would spread over much of the globe. Which meant that monogamy, under a male possessive marriage structure, was a superior scheme idealised by society. Polygamy under current marriage norms doesn’t work. So before we talk about ‘monogamy privilege’ you first need to provide an environment for polygamy to thrive, and that’s still a ways away from happening. That eroge is poly friendly doesn’t define progress, although it does challenge some of today’s norms. What would make eroge progressive would be if they demonstrated poly relationships where the women weren’t treated like the possessions of the male. And I can’t say that it is. So I don’t really see a need for praise, yet.

At first I thought it was something disgusting because I was new into it. Then i learned that my preconception of love was wrong and that made me feel sad desu.