Other Random question of the day

If it’s just your own private thoughts, I would say no, it’s entirely natural (heck, it’s kind of inevitable) to form some idea of who other people may be based on the information you have about them, no matter how little information that may be. People do it just at a glance, and these impressions tend to be sticky (this is why first impressions are so important).

If it’s with other people though, it depends on a number of things, the most important I think being what you are theorizing about and for. Like if you’re trying to theorize on where they may live so you can get to them, I think that would be a pretty clear case of an attack. Negatively speculating about someone during a sensitive situation is a case that would be more of a grey area, assuming of course you are at all trying to be truthful.

As a general rule of thumb though, no, I don’t think theorizing about what someone is like is something that could sensibly be considering an attack on them. Even if that speculation is negative, provided said speculation isn’t outright malicious in intent.
 
I never had any cats. And this is the question I was also curious about lol
 
I used to have cats! They used to lay on my head until I woke up to feed them, but I got better at ignoring them. That helped a lot.
 
Random question of the day:

Do people who behaved heinously as children and teenagers ever look back on that period of their life when they're adults and regret having acted that way?
 
Random question of the day:

Do you have any cats? If so, how do you deal with them waking you up in the middle of the night/early in the morning?
I have two Siberian fur boys I just ignore them having their Tom and Jerry moment at certain times at night by that I mean the infamous zoomies. You can’t ignore gg the oldest when he’s screaming and stomping around it’s either for who knows what or he’s hungry.
 
My old answer would've been Brendan Fraiser, but it looks like he's coming back!
 
Maybe in the plural, in the singular I think there are equivalents (sis for bro, I don't know what it would be for dude). Even then, I think that should be seen as gender-neutral only if it is commonly used to refer to groups irrespective of gender.
 
Only if both the person using it and the person/people it's being used on agree that it is being done in a way that isn't attempting to gender the latter.

Most of the time, though? No, it's not inherently gender neutral. Those words are gendered male, its just considered more acceptable for people to use male-gendered terms when addressing women, nonbinary people, or mixed-gender groups, which I don't particularly like. (And when it's men calling me "dude" or "bro" out of nowhere I become very, very tempted to call them "sis" or "gal" or w/e in return. They're much less likely to be cool with that. I don't do it, but... come on.)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top