“more diversity” includes people whose entire lives are politicized, so you have to pick between “more diversity” and “less politics”, you cannot have both
“more diversity” includes people whose entire lives are politicized, so you have to pick between “more diversity” and “less politics”, you cannot have both
banning communists opens up space for fascism? whoever could have predicted! 🤯
quit your planet-destroying job
“couldn’t hurt” is a weird turn of phrase for the suggestion of “lubricate the soles of your shoes” 🙃
everything to the left of monarchism = Marxism, apparently
though I’ll agree with you that the rabid anticommunism on .world will definitely help Redditors feel at home
what in tarnation are you talking about
and wow promoting that unhinged naming scheme for US/UK English, really another incredible echelon of coloniser-brain
“what […] Americans did to [their] native population” you mean continuing the genocide that the British colonists enthusiastically started?
he became popular by
resistingexaggerating and misrepresenting a governmentmandaterestriction on hate speech
fixed that for you
the person he encouraged to kill themself?
São Paolo in Brazil and Grenoble in France completely banned outdoor advertising, various other cities and regions (Amsterdam, Bristol, Vermont) have heavily restricted them. Dare to dream bigger than policies which have already existed for decades 😝
yes because alcohol prohibition and the WaR oN dRuGs worked out so well /s
A female changing room (noun adjunct)
Noun adjunct is a noun functioning as an adjective.
“A male character has no stats difference compared to a female.” (Probably an adjective but arguably not)
“female [character]” definitely an adjective
“female-only” is an adjective phrase where “female” is a noun. Compare “lion-only zoo.” Adjectives don’t work here (× big-only zoo)
Yes “female-only” sounds gross.
the only examples here which don’t sound completely gross are the ones where you misunderstood the part of speech…
english is a great language with which to get into a habit of saying “according to,” or “traditionally,” before statements like these.
if “why they use” is understood as a question, then it’s functioning as a question. to try to point out a “mistake” in english against some supposed objective or better standard is to fight a classist, sisyphean, and intellectually unrigorous battle against the reality of language in use. spare yourself the frustration.
that’s why the second part is important, to hide the evidence 😉
if the landlords care that much about cooking smells, they could use some of their ill-gotten wealth to install decent ventilation in kitchens…
terrifying to me that someone could look at the world around us and think a big change would be a bad thing…
in south africa they’ll murder racists like you for free 😉