Yes. Good point. In the same league as the robbed/burgled one.
Being pedantic, I'm also irritated by the misuse of "hung" when people mean "hanged" as in when they receive that particular death sentence.
Pictures and curtains are hung.
People are hanged.
Ps. I accept people can be hung. It's when it is misused that it bugs me.
Sorry Jokerman, you've completely lost me there. Never heard of what you are talking about, whatever that is. Too complicated for me. Can you give me a Noddy version?
Use of the word ‘mate’ by a person who is definitely not your mate.
Could have summed that all up with the verb, to "Wayne"OK, at the risk of mansplaining,
There is a tendency for certain people to explain things to other people as if the other people are ignorant, frail, morons while these certain people think they have an authoritative handle on how things really are in the real world. Mansplaining in this sense would be an opinionated man going on about rape or abortion to women -assuming that he had the real handle on things and they did not. Feminists see this an aspect of patriarchy. I am not unsympathetic to the insight on which the term is based.
However, it is used -in Guardian discussion threads, for example, as a put down which closes off arguments by delegitimizing the person making the argument -an identity politics move. For example, on a piece on the Wolfe Tones in the paper today, people who happen to be British, happen to know something about Ireland, and who suggest that the history of Anglo-Irish relations is more complicated than the story put forward by Irish republicans get called tansplainers -a reference to the Black and Tans.
It's not a big deal, although it is the "good guys" using the techniques they accuse the "bad guys" of using. But it bugs me (if I may use that Americanism on this thread).
Damn! Never thought of that. 20 minutes I won't get back.Could have summed that all up with the verb, to "Wayne"
Only kidding
People who don’t know the difference between “less” and “fewer”. Or “number” and “amount”.
Yes, got it now. Agree btw.OK, at the risk of mansplaining,
There is a tendency for certain people to explain things to other people as if the other people are ignorant, frail, morons while these certain people think they have an authoritative handle on how things really are in the real world. Mansplaining in this sense would be an opinionated man going on about rape or abortion to women -assuming that he had the real handle on things and they did not. Feminists see this an aspect of patriarchy. I am not unsympathetic to the insight on which the term is based.
However, it is used -in Guardian discussion threads, for example, as a put down which closes off arguments by delegitimizing the person making the argument -an identity politics move. For example, on a piece on the Wolfe Tones in the paper today, people who happen to be British, happen to know something about Ireland, and who suggest that the history of Anglo-Irish relations is more complicated than the story put forward by Irish republicans get called tansplainers -a reference to the Black and Tans.
It's not a big deal, although it is the "good guys" using the techniques they accuse the "bad guys" of using. But it bugs me (if I may use that Americanism on this thread).
American tautology grinds me too, e.g. "taxi cab", "eye glass", "neck tie", or when referring to places always naming the country, even though it is blatantly obvious from the context that "London (is in) England" or "Paris France".
The more I read this thread, the tighter my sphincter gets
"super excited" makes me want to punch the person in the face
To be fair to the Yanks here, there are loads of different Paris and London's all across America. Used to live near London, Ohio for example. There's a Paris in Texas. Milan, Versailles and Lima in Indiana etc etc. So it does need qualifying sometimes.