Things that annoy me that should annoy me

[maxjam]

40 minutes ago, Reggie Greenwood said:

Give me a definition of this “ woke” word everyone is chucking about. Is it the new “ snowflake “ ? 

 

[nottingram]

5 hours ago, maxjam said:

I appreciate that their opinions and beliefs might be different to mine - but they are different, not better. 

 

3 hours ago, maxjam said:

woke idiots

 

Are they idiots or do they just have a “different” but equally valid world view to you formed by their own experiences?

[maxjam]

15 minutes ago, nottingram said:

 

Are they idiots or do they just have a “different” but equally valid world view to you formed by their own experiences?

When I said idiot, Justin Trudeau had popped into my mind and him correcting someone for saying mankind as he preferred peoplekind. 

The difference between woke idiots and everyone else is that most people don't mind whether you say mankind or peoplekind - we might find peoplekind a bit cringeworthy, but you get to say what you want. 

As the twitter clip describes in a far better way than a quick sentence from me here does, the increasingly authoritarian woke mob demand you change your language to suit their beliefs, with any transgressions met with bullying and/or your attempted cancellation. 

[Ram-Alf]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Are commentators free to use terms like batsman? Are they not told to say batters? 
 

Do we have postmen, binmen, handy man , man with a van , white van man et etc.. where does it end? 

woMan ?

Edited August 29, 2022 by Unlucky Alf

[AndyinLiverpool]

1 hour ago, PistoldPete said:

Are commentators free to use terms like batsman? Are they not told to say batters? 
 

Do we have postmen, binmen, handy man , man with a van , white van man et etc.. where does it end? 

I suspect that commentators, just like any employee of a news-type organisation have a style manual to adhere to - particular phrases which need to be used, avoided, certain spellings etc

You still have postmen and postwomen but the gender of the person is not relevant to the job they do. The terms like 'handyman' come from a distant age when the job was done almost entirely by men. It's archaic. But you can use it as you like. Just as you can exclaim by saying, 'Ecod' or insult someone by calling them a slubberdegullion. 

Words and phrases fall out of use. It never ends.

[PistoldPete]

36 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

I suspect that commentators, just like any employee of a news-type organisation have a style manual to adhere to - particular phrases which need to be used, avoided, certain spellings etc

You still have postmen and postwomen but the gender of the person is not relevant to the job they do. The terms like 'handyman' come from a distant age when the job was done almost entirely by men. It's archaic. But you can use it as you like. Just as you can exclaim by saying, 'Ecod' or insult someone by calling them a slubberdegullion. 

Words and phrases fall out of use. It never ends.

So what do we call them? Posters? Posties? Postpersons? 

The title of batsman is relevant to the job they do they bat for a team of male cricketers. If commentators are told to use a phrase that has never been used before , that's just ridiculous. At first I thought "batter" was some horrible Americanism I didn't realise  it had something to do with removing gender from the term. Absolutely ridiculous and a big turn off every time someone uses it.   

[Ram-Alf]

7 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

So what do we call them? Posters? Posties? Postpersons? 

The title of batsman is relevant to the job they do they bat for a team of male cricketers. If commentators are told to use a phrase that has never been used before , that's just ridiculous. At first I thought "batter" was some horrible Americanism I didn't realise  it had something to do with removing gender from the term. Absolutely ridiculous and a big turn off every time someone uses it.   

In Womens cricket they never have a Silly Mid Off in case of offending, Third (Wo)man as it's sexist, Fine leg see Third (Wo)man, Slips because of under garments, And don't even mention Cow Corner or when she's out of her Crease.

[PistoldPete]

2 minutes ago, Unlucky Alf said:

In Womens cricket they never have a Silly Mid Off in case of offending, Third (Wo)man as it's sexist, Fine leg see Third (Wo)man, Slips because of under garments, And don't even mention Cow Corner or when she's out of her Crease.

Maidens, bumpers, bouncers, Googlies. Stumps. All banned. No tickling down the leg side. No hookers of course, and no-one ever pulls either. 

[Bob The Badger]

3 hours ago, maxjam said:

I'm sad to say it as a liberal, but he nails it.  

 

[Reggie Greenwood]

4 hours ago, maxjam said:

When I said idiot, Justin Trudeau had popped into my mind and him correcting someone for saying mankind as he preferred peoplekind. 

The difference between woke idiots and everyone else is that most people don't mind whether you say mankind or peoplekind - we might find peoplekind a bit cringeworthy, but you get to say what you want. 

As the twitter clip describes in a far better way than a quick sentence from me here does, the increasingly authoritarian woke mob demand you change your language to suit their beliefs, with any transgressions met with bullying and/or your attempted cancellation. 

just seems to me a word thrown about by some ( not saying you ) like snowflake was previously to shut down anyone with a different opinion . Overused and annoys me ?

 

[1of4]

The lack of green coloured pastilles in a packet of Rowntree's fruit pastels. Can often go though an entire packet and never see a single green pastille.

[Ram-Alf]

 The 1st squirt of a new bottle of Tomato Ketchup, Shake it up and go for it, A great big blob on my chips yesterday 

[Mostyn6]

People (men) that cannot go anywhere without wearing an item of clothing that shows the football team they support! 
 

quite common in holiday resorts, the missus is glammed up, even the kids have scrubbed their faces, but you dad, even in this relatively nice restaurant, are wearing you Couhiging Liverpool training top! Tvat! 

[uttoxram75]

1 hour ago, Mostyn6 said:

People (men) that cannot go anywhere without wearing an item of clothing that shows the football team they support! 
 

quite common in holiday resorts, the missus is glammed up, even the kids have scrubbed their faces, but you dad, even in this relatively nice restaurant, are wearing you Couhiging Liverpool training top! Tvat! 

Sad.

Although I'm rarely without some kind of Sheepshaggery about my person even if its only a tiny pin badge. ?

[Tamworthram]

10 hours ago, Mostyn6 said:

People (men) that cannot go anywhere without wearing an item of clothing that shows the football team they support! 
 

quite common in holiday resorts, the missus is glammed up, even the kids have scrubbed their faces, but you dad, even in this relatively nice restaurant, are wearing you Couhiging Liverpool training top! Tvat! 

Absolutely. They don’t seem to realise that no one else is either interested in or impressed by the team they support. My Derby shirt is strictly for match day only.

[angieram]

People who can't let others express their identity in the way that they choose. Including, but not limited to, the wearing of football shirts.

[i-Ram]

Edited September 3, 2022 by i-Ram
I agree though about the silliness of grown men wearing football shirts

[Mostyn6]

2 hours ago, angieram said:

People who can't let others express their identity in the way that they choose. Including, but not limited to, the wearing of football shirts.

I think you miss the point of the thread Angie. It annoys me, I’m not repressing their freedom, just saying it looks classless and chavvy and quite pathetic in some cases. 

[angieram]

9 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

I think you miss the point of the thread Angie. It annoys me, I’m not repressing their freedom, just saying it looks classless and chavvy and quite pathetic in some cases. 

Well, I think people who criticise other people's fashion choices are judgemental and snobbish and that annoys me! ?

Surely the point of the thread is to call out behaviours that are unacceptable to the majority. Is your example one of those? 

[May Contain Nuts]

Reverse snobbery annoys me, but it's impossible to accurately express and explain why this is without sounding like a snob, and that annoys me.

Some things are quantifiably, objectively, simply of a better quality than others regardless of individual tastes. 

Being accused of being snob because you're able to recognise and point out the difference in quality is a defence mechanism often used by those who either can't, can't afford to, or can't be bothered to learn the difference themselves. See what I mean about it being impossible to say without coming across as a snob!?