4 ms·
I don't think like gender words too should be treated as some sort of rainbow and treated in an arbitrary fashion. There is a good reason why we humans think of
by tn13 10y ago
I don't think like gender words too should be treated as some sort of rainbow and treated in an arbitrary fashion. There is a good reason why we humans think of "theft" as a bad thing. The author uses a "different definition" yet while trying to benefit from the negative connotation of the word's commonly understood meaning.
This is the same trick that advertisers use (Police don't like this new insurance rule) or politicians deploy (calling a person sexual offender when he was merely peeing in open) but I think journalists should show far more sense.
- kafkaesq 10y agoThat wasn't my take from the article. If anything, it sounds like he's calling out employers for profiting (significantly) from the same kind of word-bending you're describing: by telling low-wage earners, when they show up for work the first day, "Oh BTW, you're not getting paid for setting up and tearing down your workspace each day. Because you know, that's not really work." BTW it may be more accurate to describe the authors as policy researchers, rather than journalists.
- sandworm101 10y agoStandard bar exam question: Inside warehouse, worker hides pallet of expensive goods by surrounding it with cheaper goods. Boss cannot find the expensive pallet. Worker has stolen the goods, even though none have left the warehouse. He has converted them from his boss's possession to his own constructive possession. Just like a boss that withholds wages, worker cannot suddenly make the pallet appear once the cops show up. The theft has occurred even if the thief later returns the goods.