- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
I know most people that were on reddit at the time are fully aware of this and won’t be surprised but don’t dismiss the findings out of hand. It’s important that studies are being conducted and the fact that the finding match our lived experience is still noteworthy.
I’m not too sure why people on here tend to exaggerate the slightest of things. One can simply be curious, you know.
Just because you can’t spot the bullshit doesn’t mean it’s not there. By your own admission you didn’t know any of the dogwhistles nor the extra layer of gross in their love of calling everyone “cucks”.
You fell for their plausible deniability but many of us have seen these tricks 1000 times now. We’re not exaggerating, we’re experienced.
I’m not defending the paywall. If someone wants to undermine the content of the paper, they can start by reading it, not crowd-sourcing excuses.
Well that’s the point. I know what cuck can mean in that context now because it was mentionned and I was able to look it up. If everyone wants to hide what the other words are because “it’s so obvious you’re an idiot for not knowing them”, how am I supposed to recognize them in the wild? As it is I’ll probably just hear some fancy new term and assume they’re educated.
As for the paywall, maybe you weren’t against it yourself but the other comments that were agaisnt it got downvoted, though perhaps it wasn’t the sole reason.
Nobody is hiding anything. They’re slurs and dogwhistles. If you really want to know what they are, use your initiative to look them up. Insisting people on social media to explain it to you is not only indistinguishable from sea-lioning but a great way to get manipulated.
I was looking for the ones mentionned in the study I couldn’t read. I ended up looking them up as you said and that did the job too I suppose.