Subjective in this sense would mean everyone has their own singular way as opposed to “its the same/similar indepently of the person looking at it”.

“/similar”

Well my point is just it’s neither fully determined as in ahistoric rule nor random as in “changes all the time” or “everyone has their own singular definitions and concepts”. And in between there is the sweet spot of understanding, interpretation and development…

Objective and socially constructed isn’t a ‘hard’ contradiction.

Yes of course language evolves and so on, but in a given time(period) it needs to be interpretable more or less independently from the specific actor (a dictionary ensures this, even though it needs to be updated regularly).

In other words yeah sometimes language comes up with new stuff. If it would do it all the time, it wouldn’t function

This is a week analogy… french only works as a means of communication because it has internal rules that are objective (as in different people understand the same/very similar thing when hearing/seeing a symbol/word).

Singularity of experience is cool, but anything social requires communication/synchronization.

Even though gender is used as a box or definition people are forced to fit into (and this is bad), reducing human experience to a blackbox kind of singularity is a highly individualist take.

You can work on understanding each other without forcing anyone to fit into your definition…

Imagine the letter H and G would look similar. Now imagine there was a language that didn’t have the letter H. People who spoke that language would post: “Hot Dog” and then go like “aaaahahaha imagine God Dog, like a god thats a dog”.

Now add the fact that germans know and use the word burger regularly and do posess knowledge of the existence of different languages and that “burger” is an english word, thus pronunciation differs.

So I’d say no, not funny.

Then again I have laughed about and made jokes that made use of the similarity of burger and Bürger. But I guess the “rofl different languages”-element needs to be combined with smth more to qualify as a joke.

Yours, german giving german answers

If the 3 are associated, thus inclined to push their narrative it doesn’t change much that there are 3 of them, I’d say.

I only read the wiki article and it seems more plausible this (as most things?) was invented by countless little remixes.

Of course an “origin story” is also the more attractive narrative on the recieving side, since you know, people are used to and like stories with clear protagonists

So relatable

Seems rather like he didn’t invent it

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiramisu

Thats something entirely different though. Using votes to show disagreement/agreement makes sense as a tool of democratic communication. This goes for comments that contain statements.

OP describes a “jail” type of usage, where there is nothing to disagree but people downvote amyways (to feel superior maybe), wich sucks cause it reads like hate

Grind’em down with tiny progress

So close to not denormalizing gay men, yet…