• Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, but you can also just say men, that’s fine. If we go that route we should add asterisks on every word with explanations and definitions and whatnot.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m trying to make the poing that changing language to be inclusive doesn’t work. It’s the same as the LGBT group, that now is LGBTQIRBFHAHFH or something? I lost count. Same with the damn rainbow flag that now looks more like a million pixels project than a flag.

        Every day there is somebody out there that feels special and now needs to be included too and it hasn’t stopped and it won’t stop.

        Somebody is trans and wanted to be a man and transitioned? How about we just call them what they wanted to be in the first place? “Men”. Simple.

        This entire “people with penises” languages is just made up solutions for made up problems that doesn’t actually solve or improve anything

        • I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’ve made so many comments to whine about one person using specific and inclusive language. You waste a lot more time demanding that the general population regress to your level of ignorance than you would just observing and moving on.

          In this case, the person was talking about penises and the people who have them. The rules you are trying to apply don’t work here. Trans people without penises would not be included in what the person was talking about.

          Nobody cares that you don’t like the aesthetic of the progress flag. Nobody cares that LGBTQIA2 is too big for your brain. You’re not the main character. I think that’s the real issue you’re rallying against here.