142
Homeopathy... Oh boy, my mom believes in it. As well as crystals with special powers.
this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
142 points (94.4% liked)
Ask Lemmy
31537 readers
1162 users here now
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"Fahrenheit describes the level of comfort for a human. From coldest to warmest that you may experience outside."
As an American I used to use a variation of this phrase.
Then I decided to experimentally switch to using Celsius. Took a few weeks/months to really internalize it and stop having to do on-the-fly conversions, but honestly I love it.
It’s remarkable how useful having 0 be freezing is for weather. It makes understanding sub-freezing temperatures much easier. Which also helps reinforce what a degree Celsius means.
I wish other Americans would try it. I haven’t gone back, all my devices are still on Celsius over five years later.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Europeans shaking and crying at the realization that the difference between 70° and 75° is more obvious and meaningful than 21.11° and 23.88°
I don't understand why the difference between 70 ad 75 is more obvious than 21 and 24. Can you explain it?
Americans shaking that 20-25C is more obvious than 68-77
Above 30 you just complain 25-30 you wear shorts 20-25 you wear whatever 15-20 you wear a t shirt and jeans 10-15 you consider a light jacket or a long sleeve 5-10 you firmly wear the light jacket or long sleeve 0-5 you bring a heavier coat Below 0 you complain
Beautiful 5 degree increments that perfectly describe what to wear in C Where with Fahrenheit you end up with weird numbers like 86 degrees
load more comments
(3 replies)
*Europeans, Asians, Africans, southamericans, australiaandoceanians and 23/24 of northamericans
*21.11°
Combined with the trite "Fahrenheit is for humans, celsius is for water".
load more comments
(16 replies)
load more comments
(11 replies)
In posts like this and elsewhere, commenters kept claiming the noun female to refer to a human is generally derogatory or offensive.
Someone wrote
Occasionally my partner does or says some things that remind me of the “manosphere” aka 4chan neckbeards.
A perfect example was that he sometimes says “females” when he means “women”. I explain that it’s not a swear word but it’s still derogatory. I explain why. Once I did, he understood and stopped doing it.
Despite abundant evidence here (search females), in classifieds, personals & online equivalents (eg, ads that limit eligibility to females), or text corpus searches revealing that the noun female referring to humans is often non-derogatory, so it all depends on the context, they'd insist that usage of the word itself is offensive, insulting, or disrespectful, and they wanted everyone taught to think that until it's the generally accepted meaning. They didn't seem to consider that promoting unconventionally sexist framings (ie, female is a dirty word) for wider adoption in our language serves sexists more than anything, and it might make more sense to resist that.
Outside of a purely descriptive term of the biological differences between the sexes, that is derogatory.
It is often used to dehumanize women, as the term is mostly used when talking about animals.
So you didn't look at the
abundant evidence here (search females), in classifieds, personals & online equivalents (eg, ads that limit eligibility to females), or text corpus searches revealing that the noun female referring to humans is often non-derogatory
did you?
Why would I?
You cite no source for what you write as if it was fact.
The fact that you try to make it look like scientific language tells me that you actually know why the term is derogatory, and you doubling down makes me think you argue in bad faith.
Confirmed: couldn't even search females in lemmy. Disregards common classified ads. Claims "bad faith" while ignoring evidence in bad faith.
Why would I?
Because the claim is empirical, and yours violates plain observation?
Searching random websites is anecdotal, not actual statistics
Statistics aren't needed to reject an overgeneralization. On the contrary, you would need something like statistical generalization: you're (over)generalizing the meaning of a word. Any counterexamples suffice to defeat a bad generalization, since no sample should contradict a true generalization: look it up or take introductory logic.
You're overgeneralizing, and only asserting your claim doesn't begin to meet the burden to support that. In contrast, I've indicated evidence exists & where it's readily found, which you ignore. Ignoring evidence that doesn't suit you is a fallacy (often committed in bad faith).
The fact remains that counterexamples to your claim are common, which wouldn't be expected if the conventional meaning were derogatory.
Here's an example quoting a story in the news:
“What if I would have been armed,” she said. “You’re breaking in. What am I supposed to think? My initial thought was we were being robbed—that my daughters, being females, were being kidnapped. You have guns pointed in our faces. Can you just reprogram yourself and see us as humans, as women? A little bit of mercy. […]"
So your claim is that by referring to her daughters as females, this mother is insulting them?
While I might be able to argue in "bad faith", the unsolicited speech productions of the community do not. Do you want to ignore more examples?
I see no link to a study or anything, so nothing new
Counterexamples don't require studies: learn logic.
Refuting the claim "men are generally bald" merely requires the existence of a few men who aren't. You're claiming "female is a derogatory noun to humans": as shown it isn't. Can you explain what the mother quoted in the news is saying about her daughters if your claim about female is true? No, your claim fails.
Deny plain observation all you want: your claim is false.
You have yet to show that it isn't derogatory, so far you just have your own oppinion.
Thus you are wrong.
Now I do see that you are registered at lemmynsfw.com, generally I would not hold your instance against you if you make a resonable argument in good faith, but based on your creepy attitude and fixation with derogatory/demeaning terms combined with your instance of choice tells me that this is a kink, which is fine if done with consent, but you are pushing your kink on others outside of spaces where it is accepted.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)