My favourite variation on this idea is from Dresden Codak:
I think my favorite was “government is autistic boy.”
I’m not good with literature.
One that immediately stood out for me personally was the reverse robot reveal. That’s the Cybermen from Doctor Who ❤️
I’d love to know in which story the blad person is killed by a poisoned wig 😂
Unintentional incest happens in Star Wars 👍 (it was unintentional, right?)
“It was a dream” is just plain cliché
Indian legend ignored I think it’s pretty much every episode of Scooby Doo
Unintentional incest is old, from Greek mythology.
blad person is killed by a poisoned wig
there’s a simpsons episode (treehouse of horror something) where homer gets snake’s hair as a transplant and it kills him I think
How could anyone be so insesivite to use the non inclusive word “man”
Everyone knows Daffy is of duckkind. We should use a more inclusive wording such as “jumble of atoms vs x”
Metamodern: man vs perception, man vs language, man vs epistemology
deleted by creator
The “man” in these examples is a dinosaur.
I guess women do not exist in literature.
“Man” in this context means “mankind”, not “male”.
It’s a Looney Tunes meme. Perhaps you’re seeing issues that aren’t really issues.
It’s an outdated term, but still commonly used. I prefer “humanity,” myself.
I assume this is because Daffy identifies as male.
Also I’m genuinely shocked how half a second of looking at a duck under “No God” immediately gave me the impression of Hunter S. Thompson.
It’s the glasses and the thousand-yard stare into the sun
Unironic circular reasoning patriarchy.
Man used to be used the way we use the word “human” in modern English, with there being modifiers to signify male or female. At some point we just dropped modifiers for male and decided “man” meant male. However man is still used as a general term for people. There’s definitely patriarchal connotations to it but that’s why you still see it.
Yes, which is why the appropriate response to someone pointing out the discrepancy is “you’re right, I may or may not care enough to do something about my own casual usage of the language” not being a condescending ass linking a definition that everyone knows because that wasn’t the point of bringing it up.
the appropriate response to someone pointing out the discrepancy is
“you’re right, I may or may not care enough to do something about my own casual usage of the language”shut the fuck up we all know what’s meant hereFTFY
If this is true:
linking a definition that everyone knows
Then they already knew they’re being a pedantic jackass and wanted to do it anyway. The correct response to a person like that is dismissal, as they’re providing nothing to the conversation.
Whatever floats your boat, g*mer.
Stay mad, bby
