519
New gender gap (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/dataisbeautiful@lemmy.ml
389 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

The issue is that your definition is "dumbed down" to the point that it loses utility when discussing politics and conceals cultural hegemony.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    No it doesn't because, you just have to specify what you mean because the word has multiple definitions and in OP's example it's the definition I've provided that's being used and you should have known because of the context (liberalism as opposed to conservatism).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Of course the word has multiple definitions, that definition just obscures the shit out of everything and isn't very useful. It literally obscures that conservatives are also liberals (in the more meaningful sense) and obscures the difference between left and liberal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It literally obscures that conservatives are also liberals (in the more meaningful sense) and obscures the difference between left and liberal.

    Only if you use another definition of the word.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    How do you talk about liberal hegemony (marxist definition) while using the nonsense definition in a non-bulky way?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    First of all, I already answered that question many times and second of all, you calling it a "nonsense" definition shows that you're just arguing in bad faith because you're not ready to accept that you just didn't know that the word has multiple definitions depending on context.

    Good night.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    No, no you haven't, you've just been smug.

    But I'm glad we are the point of the pigeon shitting all over the board and flying away, if that is how you insist on acting.

    you’re just arguing in bad faith because you’re not ready to accept that you just didn’t know that the word has multiple definitions depending on context.

    Do you think anyone born in the US doesn't know the most common definition? The rejection of it is because it is a bad definition that serves to obscure how politics actually functions. I also literally reference this, but you insist that I dont know that words can have multiple meanings. Who is arguing in bad faith?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent