How are guns going to solve oppressive legislation?
they aren’t. At a federal level, and even a state level, they won’t. As for the doing it for decades part, it’s because they’re pansies who like to dick ride on a concept that makes them feel better. For some reason.
Regardless, it’s technically a non answer, but this is also a form of a non question. “why would you need to own a gun” can range from literally anything to “i hunt” to “sport” to “self protection” to “self protection but from the wild” to “the sock pill” There are a million and one reasons someone could own a gun. And a million and one purposes for it to serve.
And nope, your sexuality doesn’t matter at all. You can claim to be absolutely anything online and the pro-gun community seems to be riddled with sock puppets who can’t keep their story straight.
to be clear, i googled pansy prior to this, and the only thing that came up was the flower, so i figured it must not be important. Anyway it’s literally defined as “a weak man” Which is exactly how im using that, specifically to describe a specific type of right winger. Who could arguably be defined as “weak men” oh and also, i’ve used that word a lot to define people. I’ve never once been yelled at for using it, even though i hang around quite a few queer people on the regular. This is my first instance of such, maybe it’s becoming a slur now? I don’t know. I would think it used to be a slur about 30 years ago, but probably not anymore. I could be wrong, if you have the etymological history of the word at the ready feel free to bring it out.
also i know it doesn’t matter, i just thought it would be funny to mention it. The usual “i can’t be racist because i have a black friend” joke type beat. I mean, it’s the internet after all, if we can’t shitpost, then why bother doing anything at all. Right?
Anyway, I can claim to be absolutely anything on the internet, perhaps you should go have a look through my post history, and find out that i’m relatively neutral to everything, except for people explicitly denying others rights. I’m unsure if you’re calling me pro-gun, i’m not, i would appreciate it if you didn’t pull shit out of your ass, and try to define me as such when i could literally just be making fun of you to amuse myself (i’m not) seems rather hypocritical for you to tell me that i can’t state who i am, and then for you to explicitly state who i am, if you are doing that.
Speaking of the pro-gun community, there are a lot of problems in it, notably the fact that there seems to be a specific subset of people who fully “back” 2a, only to immediately double back on it when they realize that it means queer/left leaning people get to own guns because “well it makes me feel unsafe” which for someone who opposes all forms of gun control because “it violates 2a” seems rather authoritarian to me.
but yeah no, continue to tell me how i’m a piece of shit righty, even though i’m not, and continue to exclaim that i’m homophobic even though the contextual usage of that word makes literally zero sense in a homophobic manner. How many gay pro 2a “the government isn’t going to take our guns away” conservatives do you know? Definitely not enough to classify it as such.
Just because it’s fallen out of fashion with homophobes doesn’t magically make it not a slur. Did you go to highschool when kids still described everything as negative as “gay”? Was that fine, as long as they “didn’t mean it that way” or were never called out for it?
It’s defined as meaning “a weak man” because people used to accuse those “weak men” of being homosexuals, the same way people use “pussies” today. The definition you’re ignoring was what it meant and the definition you’re clinging to was who it used on.
yeah, and just because it’s still technically a slur, doesn’t make it automatically offensive. There are a lot of words that we use now that used to be highly offensive, and vice versa, the times change, language adapts, people move forward.
Queer used to arguably be a slur, though more accurately a derogatory term. Now it’s literally in the acronym of LGBTQ. A lot of people call themselves queer.
Regardless, looking into the history of the word pansy, it seems to predate the slur usage of it. At a time when women generally had a different place in society, and men were considered to be much more physically active, for lack of a better descriptive term. It quite literally just defines itself out to “a man who is as physically strong as a women” which given the time period, explains the insult. That shifted over time to mean “effeminate” which is basically just the same thing. And was picked up as a slur. And is now currently defined as a slur because nobody uses it anymore (except for me, because i think it sounds funny)
so in some effect, the definition you’re using, exists based on the definition of it from hundreds of years ago. And it was just co-opted by shitty people. Hitler manufactured a lot of industrialized weaponry. I don’t see anybody calling industrialized weaponry offensive towards jews. Likewise i see no reason for slurs to be offensive when not used in the context one would expect it to be used in.
Part of the reason why slurs are so offensive, is because they’re used to denigrate a certain group of people. Of which, i am not doing. Perhaps i’m wrong about the historical definition of this word in particular, but from my knowledge slurs are sourced from words with related meanings, and the thing that makes it a slur, is the colloquial/societal usage of that word at regular, in that context.
In fact, the very definition of the term slur itself is generally used to describe things that “are roughly like this” or more homogeneous. Which ironically, given the typical usage of slurs, and how they generally work. Lines up pretty well with my definition of them. If what it meant was all that mattered, then we wouldn’t be here right now arguing the contextual relations of the slur itself, because everybody would agree with you when you state that “what it meant” matters more than “who it was used on” and like i’ve said, so far you’re the only person that’s particularly upset about this.
It’s defined as meaning “a weak man” because people used to accuse those “weak men” of being homosexuals
or was it that it was being used to accuse homosexuals of being “weak men” questions and answers that will never be satisfied…
Excuses and apologism that could be used to justify everything from high-schoolers saying “that test was gay” to 4chan constantly calling people “removeds”.
You’re reading the first three Google results then declaring yourself a higher authority than the dictionary.
“Anything” is a deliberate non-answer that can’t be argued against.
How are guns going to solve oppressive legislation?
If they’ve been doing it for decades, why hasn’t it worked?
they aren’t. At a federal level, and even a state level, they won’t. As for the doing it for decades part, it’s because they’re pansies who like to dick ride on a concept that makes them feel better. For some reason.
Regardless, it’s technically a non answer, but this is also a form of a non question. “why would you need to own a gun” can range from literally anything to “i hunt” to “sport” to “self protection” to “self protection but from the wild” to “the sock pill” There are a million and one reasons someone could own a gun. And a million and one purposes for it to serve.
Okay, so you can answer it, just not without using a homophobic slur.
when did i use a homophobic slur? I’m genuinely confused.
For what it matters, which is probably none, i’m ace. And pretty fucking gay for one.
Here is the definition of “pansy”.
And nope, your sexuality doesn’t matter at all. You can claim to be absolutely anything online and the pro-gun community seems to be riddled with sock puppets who can’t keep their story straight.
to be clear, i googled pansy prior to this, and the only thing that came up was the flower, so i figured it must not be important. Anyway it’s literally defined as “a weak man” Which is exactly how im using that, specifically to describe a specific type of right winger. Who could arguably be defined as “weak men” oh and also, i’ve used that word a lot to define people. I’ve never once been yelled at for using it, even though i hang around quite a few queer people on the regular. This is my first instance of such, maybe it’s becoming a slur now? I don’t know. I would think it used to be a slur about 30 years ago, but probably not anymore. I could be wrong, if you have the etymological history of the word at the ready feel free to bring it out.
also i know it doesn’t matter, i just thought it would be funny to mention it. The usual “i can’t be racist because i have a black friend” joke type beat. I mean, it’s the internet after all, if we can’t shitpost, then why bother doing anything at all. Right?
Anyway, I can claim to be absolutely anything on the internet, perhaps you should go have a look through my post history, and find out that i’m relatively neutral to everything, except for people explicitly denying others rights. I’m unsure if you’re calling me pro-gun, i’m not, i would appreciate it if you didn’t pull shit out of your ass, and try to define me as such when i could literally just be making fun of you to amuse myself (i’m not) seems rather hypocritical for you to tell me that i can’t state who i am, and then for you to explicitly state who i am, if you are doing that.
Speaking of the pro-gun community, there are a lot of problems in it, notably the fact that there seems to be a specific subset of people who fully “back” 2a, only to immediately double back on it when they realize that it means queer/left leaning people get to own guns because “well it makes me feel unsafe” which for someone who opposes all forms of gun control because “it violates 2a” seems rather authoritarian to me.
but yeah no, continue to tell me how i’m a piece of shit righty, even though i’m not, and continue to exclaim that i’m homophobic even though the contextual usage of that word makes literally zero sense in a homophobic manner. How many gay pro 2a “the government isn’t going to take our guns away” conservatives do you know? Definitely not enough to classify it as such.
Just because it’s fallen out of fashion with homophobes doesn’t magically make it not a slur. Did you go to highschool when kids still described everything as negative as “gay”? Was that fine, as long as they “didn’t mean it that way” or were never called out for it?
It’s defined as meaning “a weak man” because people used to accuse those “weak men” of being homosexuals, the same way people use “pussies” today. The definition you’re ignoring was what it meant and the definition you’re clinging to was who it used on.
yeah, and just because it’s still technically a slur, doesn’t make it automatically offensive. There are a lot of words that we use now that used to be highly offensive, and vice versa, the times change, language adapts, people move forward.
Queer used to arguably be a slur, though more accurately a derogatory term. Now it’s literally in the acronym of LGBTQ. A lot of people call themselves queer.
Regardless, looking into the history of the word pansy, it seems to predate the slur usage of it. At a time when women generally had a different place in society, and men were considered to be much more physically active, for lack of a better descriptive term. It quite literally just defines itself out to “a man who is as physically strong as a women” which given the time period, explains the insult. That shifted over time to mean “effeminate” which is basically just the same thing. And was picked up as a slur. And is now currently defined as a slur because nobody uses it anymore (except for me, because i think it sounds funny)
so in some effect, the definition you’re using, exists based on the definition of it from hundreds of years ago. And it was just co-opted by shitty people. Hitler manufactured a lot of industrialized weaponry. I don’t see anybody calling industrialized weaponry offensive towards jews. Likewise i see no reason for slurs to be offensive when not used in the context one would expect it to be used in.
Part of the reason why slurs are so offensive, is because they’re used to denigrate a certain group of people. Of which, i am not doing. Perhaps i’m wrong about the historical definition of this word in particular, but from my knowledge slurs are sourced from words with related meanings, and the thing that makes it a slur, is the colloquial/societal usage of that word at regular, in that context.
In fact, the very definition of the term slur itself is generally used to describe things that “are roughly like this” or more homogeneous. Which ironically, given the typical usage of slurs, and how they generally work. Lines up pretty well with my definition of them. If what it meant was all that mattered, then we wouldn’t be here right now arguing the contextual relations of the slur itself, because everybody would agree with you when you state that “what it meant” matters more than “who it was used on” and like i’ve said, so far you’re the only person that’s particularly upset about this.
or was it that it was being used to accuse homosexuals of being “weak men” questions and answers that will never be satisfied…
Excuses and apologism that could be used to justify everything from high-schoolers saying “that test was gay” to 4chan constantly calling people “removeds”.
You’re reading the first three Google results then declaring yourself a higher authority than the dictionary.