dandelion (she/her)

Message me and let me know what you were wanting to learn about me here and I’ll consider putting it in my bio.

  • no, I’m not named after the character in The Witcher, I’ve never played
  • 0 Posts
  • 7 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: March 2nd, 2024
  • dandelion (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zonetomemes@lemmy.world•like 80% of internet slang
    1·
    6 hours ago

    I was imagining in my example that “green” might be adopted to mean red only in certain contexts, like used ironically or humorously to mean red, not in a way that erased or overrode the word’s general meaning as green. This is to match the symmetry of misused words like gyatt that continue to have their original meaning and use, but get warped into a new meaning through misuse and then adoption of that misuse in a certain context, such as among white children on Fortnite.

    As opposed to a complete inversion or change of the meaning of the word such that “green” would no longer mean green anymore but only mean red (this of course could still happen, it just wasn’t the kind of case I was trying to illustrate).

  • dandelion (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zonetomemes@lemmy.world•like 80% of internet slang
    17·
    6 hours ago

    I am not sure that’s true, language can absolutely be misused, when an individual uses a word in a way nobody recognizes, it fails to function as language and is worth considering genuinely misused. It’s only when a “misuse” gains enough traction that people can effectively use it to communicate that it is an evolution rather than a misuse.

    The point is that the language is about use, e.g. getting a concept across, and it can absolutely fail or be applied incorrectly.

    Take for example if a variety of mugs are on a table and I wanted the red mug. If I said “pass me the green mug”, that would be a misuse of “green” as meaning red, and it would fail to communicate, as long as there are other mugs and my meaning cannot be inferred.

    If there is clearly only one mug, a person might think I was mistaken or colorblind and still get my intended meaning, but it would still be considered a misuse of “green”.

    If enough people used “green” to mean red, maybe because my family thought the mistake was funny and adopted “green” to mean red as an in-joke, it might grow out of being a misuse into a new meaning.

    The same thing is happening when white children misuse AAVE and generate slang, “gyatt” for example meaning “god” as in “gyatt damn” becomes mistakenly applied to mean a butt because of misunderstanding about how gyatt was originally used. The misuse becomes new slang, but it could have easily remained an obscure and forgotten misuse if it didn’t catch-on with enough people such that it took on a new meaning.

  • dandelion (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zonetoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Horny🧠
    1·
    2 days ago

    There are a few clarifications I would like to make:

    Having an erection does not require the person to have sex, and is not the same as being horny or desiring sex.

    Having a penis does not guarantee you have erections (let alone involuntary erections, which is what you seem to be talking about). People with penises who are testosterone dominant do have involuntary erections, but even so, see my first point for why that’s not relevant.

    Your claim was about being horny being a bigger problem for people with penises, which is a fair assumption but has more to do with testosterone than the penis (like you’ve pointed out, trans men can be very horny without a “penis” - though it should be noted here that male and female genitalia are more similar than dissimilar and have the same structures of a phallus and glans, just in different configurations).

    so it’s already suggesting that it’s not a myth.

    The myth is the belief that men are horny while women are not, the reality is that it varies significantly by person. with significant overlap between the sexes. There is a difference on average, but it’s not as large or total as people commonly believe.

    And finally, as you have pointed out the social context will skew the data significantly with fewer women being comfortable with sex than men, fewer women having learned to masturbate than men, and fewer women willing to discuss or disclose their sexual feelings or behavior than men. These differences in how sex is treated socially means whatever biological differences there are is muddled, especially when what was measured was self-reporting on frequency of masturbation. It’s possible that men and women are far more similar than dissimilar than even the current evidence we have points to.