Yea, nah. Say what you want about X, but Meta is in a whole other league than X. In my communities it’s monopolising to a large degree:
amongs others. All essential services that Meta took over one by one.
X on the other hand is just a micro-blogging platform.
I’d rather be a loner than go back to that shitbook.
Did you watch it?
(edit: typo)
Ok but my point is that when it doesn’t correlate, it becomes clear how grammatical gender is independent from the person’s gender.
It becomes even clearer when you consider all nouns by definition have a grammatical gender - inanimate objects, abstract concepts, etc, even though the thing described clearly doesn’t have a gender. Eg die Tür ist offen. Ich schliesse sie. (transl.: the door is open. I close it.) ‘Sie’ being the female pronoun used to refer to the grammatically female door.
When my brain interpreted ‘they’ singular to refer to a unspecified so-far unnamed person or an already mentioned group, it was definitely confusing to have it suddenly used to refer to someone who had just been referred to by name. This was definitely a novel use of ‘they’ for me at the time and I don’t understand why no-one else ever seems to have this kind of confusion. I did get used to it but I don’t think it’s as universal as some of y’all realise.
Edit: I just learnt the term ‘indeterminate antecedent’ from the Wikipedia article someone else linked. Thanks to them, I just got a little bit smarter. ;-)
Child - das Kind - grammatical gender: neuter. Referred to in context using the gender-neutral pronoun ‘es’ (it). The pronoun used correlates with the grammatical gender of the noun used, not the gender of the person referred to.
Eg Ein Kind lacht. Es hat etwas gesehen. (transl: A child laughs. He/she/they saw something.)
Agree, there’re some decent < 0.5% beers around, made with just a different strain of yeast.
“They started it.” “We are the real victims here.” “Antisemitic terrorists”
yes.
The US tortures its dissidents. Just look at how they treated War on Terror whistleblower Chelsea Manning. Even the UN special rapporteur on torture spoke up about her treatment. She was driven to attempt suicide in prison multiple times. Including when she refused to cooperate with the secret Grand Jury investigating WikiLeaks and Julian Assange.
Julian Assange is about to be buried in a US prison and get a taste of that same medicine. Where are the Guardian outrage-articles on that? Oh, wait, that’s right. They threw him under the bus as soon as he’d given them access to the best scoops of the century (US diplomatic cables). The Guardian journos divulged the pass phrase to the unredacted cables in their book giving anyone who could locate the files online access. Cryptome published the unredacted cables before WL did while Assange called the State Department trying to warn them of the bad news. The Guardian then tried to make out like WL had acted irresponsibly in publishing the unredacted cables, when in reality the cat was already out of the bag and WL was doing harm-minimization. The Guardian’s blame-shifting makes my blood boil.
The ‘Guardian’ has no ethics and can’t be trusted on anything political imo.
Hi Empricon, let me try.
Major David McBride was put on trial Nov 2023 in Canberra, Australia for releasing classified documents to the ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation).
During the first few days his team asked the judge to rule on the meaning of ‘duty’ as this was key to the charges. He argued that with his oath, he had a duty to serve the wider public, and that there can be exceptions to following your superior’s orders. The judge ruled in favour of the prosecution that duty means only to follow your superior’s orders. McBride’s team immediately appealed this ruling. The appelate court rejected the appeal at that moment saying it was ‘not obviously wrong’.
Together with the fact that key evidence was taken away on ‘national security’ gounds, McBride was left with no other option than to plead guilty. His bail was extended until sentencing in March. The judge is considering an ‘intensive corrections order’ rather than prison time.
In this video, McBride explains his decision to plead guilty and and what happens next. He also announces that he will appeal the court ruling on duty due to public support for that and as it’s very important for Australia. He will probably have served his sentance by the time that goes to court though.
click on the link, I dare you.
and here I thought it was a parody…