No need to name names or sources.

Mine has to be some dude that insisted that advertising is a “30,000 year old technology”

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    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.

    • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Confirmed: couldn’t even search females in lemmy. Disregards common classified ads. Claims “bad faith”.

      Why would I?

      Because the claim is empirical, and yours violates plain observation?

      • stoy@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        Searching random websites is anecdotal, not actual statistics

        • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          That applies more to your counterclaim: as a generalization, your claim has a greater burden of evidence, which by only asserting your claim, you haven’t attempted to meet. In contrast, I’ve indicated evidence exists & where it’s readily found, which you’ve ignored. Much isn’t required my claim that your generalization is false, because refuting a generalization merely requires counterexamples.

          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 more examples?

            • lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              Counterexamples don’t require studies.

              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.

              • stoy@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 hours ago

                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.