this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
1204 points (95.5% liked)

memes

10217 readers
3475 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I don't get why it grinds everyone gears. Isn't it just an hyperbole? (y'know like for the hypersoups ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ )

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What bothered me about it was that they're stating it's everyone doing these things, but I think it's probably a small minority.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Someone sourced a couple higher in the comments. Their info showed 2% of the populous doing what "literally everyone" is doing. The other stat they included was 80% of the populous had never used a sleep aid in their life. So the talk of it being hyperbole is even a stretch.

Saying literally everyone in the U.S. is a cigarette smoker would be more accurate. (Not accurate)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It is hyperbole, but the problem is that it's using a word that was supposed to specify that something was not hyperbole as hyperbole, rendering it useless.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the problem is that it's using a word that was supposed to specify that something was not hyperbole as hyperbole, rendering it useless.

... Or... Because it's a word specifically meant to indicate it is not hyperbolic, using it in that way is literally the superlative hyperbole.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

At the cost of the word's intended use, unfortunately. RIP literally. It literally died.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Now you have to hit literally in the chest with an adrenaline shot to bring lividity into its decaying body.

quite literally

actually literally

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

A good point, I haven't seen "quite literally" used to mean "figuratively." Perhaps there's some usefulness to be had yet.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

rendering it useless

Another example of hyperbole.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Okay, rendering it far less useful.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

People, including many famous authors, have been using literally this way for hundreds of years.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes, but its use to mean its opposite didn't become widespread until the past decade or so.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

People have been complaining about it longer than a decade, so you're way off there.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally

Tldr: common use in the "figurative" sense for since the 1800s.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Incorrect. People have been using it the way you are complaining about for hundreds of years. It’s a new phenomenon that people complain about it being used the way you disapprove of. I’d attribute the recent complaints to lack of literary exposure and anti intellectualism in recent years.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Except some of the earliest uses of the word "literally" that didn't pertain to letters and glyps we in the form of hyperbole.
Literal as factual and literal as exaggeration both about the same age and precedent, and have been used long enough that it's just part of the English language at this point.
May as well complain about how "discreet" and "indiscreet" are opposites, but "flammable" and "inflammable" are the same.

https://people.sc.fsu.edu/~jburkardt/fun/wordplay/autoanto.html

English is a language of contradictions and massively confusing syntax. News at 11.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is that a LinksTheSun reference

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It might've been where I got it from :p

It wasn't conscious but I used to watch what he did awhile back.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think because it's a pretty gross mischaracterization of the demographic? Usually hyperbole is used for effect to more emphatically illustrate a generally true or accepted point.

The number of Americans who use nightly sleep aids is extremely low. Like, a vast vast majority of people never take them. I don't know anyone who regularly takes them, and honestly I don't know many who take them even occasionally.

So this meme uses hyperbole to drive home the idea that Americans have a pill problem regarding sleep aids and no one in Europe does. I have no idea how the numbers shake out in Europe but I can say in America it is not as characterized. So it's less hyperbole (exaggeration of a fact) and more like a lie.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok so I did a quick search and:

  • 2% of americans declare using sleeping aids daily.
  • 18% declare using some some

So yeah the amount of people "litteraly using medication to sleep every night" ia quite low. The use amongst the population is still generally high so I wouldn't directly classify that hyperbole as a lie. (but I'm not claiming I'm right on that it's a feelings calculation).

I'm also pretty sure these numbers are underreported for example because of the stigma around using "recreational drugs" as an illegal mean to self medicate.

Also it's nice for you to have nobody (that you know of ofc) struggling to sleep.

Where I'd personally feel more nitpicky about that meme is the opposition with Europe. I don't think we sleep much better. A lot of people around me (and myself included) heavily rely on sedation in one form or another to have any semblance of sleep. Although there might be some selection bias since alot of folks I know are handicaped in one way or another so we don't tend to have the best physical and psychic health ^^'

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Appreciate you finding numbers when I didn't go to that effort. It makes me wonder if numbers are pretty similar globally. 2% having chronic insomnia doesn't sound completely out of line to me.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Hey \o

The planet litterally when halfway around the sun during the time I took to respond to you.

The definition of chronic insomnia is "at least 3 times a week for at least 3 monthes" (simplified but that's the idea)

So the real number of people with chronic insomnia is at the very least 2% but it's probably closer to those 18%.

I hope time has been kind to you in those last 6 monthes. I've got a new treatment that allows me to have a good night of sleep almost everyday and it's a godsend ^^