5 ms·

Yes. I've encountered people who can't explain what the patriarchy is but still use that term. Back in 2016 somebody told me Hillary Clinton was a "crook". What

Yes. I've encountered people who can't explain what the patriarchy is but still use that term. Back in 2016 somebody told me Hillary Clinton was a "crook". What a strange word that nobody would normally use. He couldn't explain if it means criminal or corrupt or something else or why she was that. Better to just not say anything if you're only parroting buzzwords. Edit. Just caught myself say "parroting". That's one of those needlessly contentious or offensive words.

pwdisswordfish6 6y ago
> "crook" [...] Better to just not say anything if you're only parroting buzzwords. The buzzword of 2020/2021 appears to be "grifter" and its variations. On topic with the article and related to this is the word "dogwhistle". (The funny thing is that "dogwhistle" can itself be a dogwhistle.) It doesn't get used as much in my experience as "grifter", though, which is so wantonly thrown about nowadays that it may as well have no meaning. I avoid using both of these words. There are better ways to say it.
- Trasmatta 6y ago
  Dogwhistle is one of those phrases that has been so overused in the past year that it's largely lost its original meaning. It's like "gaslighting", which people seem to now use as a synonym for any kind of abuse. Or how people say "humblebrag" for regular brags.
  - temp-dude-87844 6y ago
    'Dogwhistle' has drifted in its invocation in subtle but important ways. Originally it referred to the notion that some people would interpret coded language in the choice of phrasing or a hear a different connotation that the author did not intend. Then it was used as a descriptive accusation by outgroup members to claim that the speaker deliberately used coded language to appeal to an ingroup. Then it was used to describe the deliberate tactic of crafting word choice to appeal to a group while maintaining plausible deniability and avoiding alienating those not in the know. Then it was used to disparage certain groups by claiming that the group's writers and readers were communicating in coded language by tacit agreement, to affirm among each other positions the critics considered reprehensible. And finally it achieved self-reference by becoming a word some feel is being used as coded language by other groups to disparage them. It's unfortunate because each shade of meaning is a useful concept that would benefit from a succinct descriptor, but 'dogwhistle' has been churned through the semantic drift to where it's a word of subjective vitriol and not an objective descriptor of anything in particular.
  - etblg 6y ago
    The use of "gaslighting" is the one that bugs me the most. Is this entity intentionally and repeatedly lying to you in a way to make you doubt your own sanity and rely on them for determining what is real or not ......or are they just disagreeing or disputing? Doesn't matter, if you call something gaslighting you get to be the victim and the other side can be labelled an abuser and who wants to side with an abuser?
    - Trasmatta 6y ago
      It's also a disservice to people who have actually been gaslit, because the term is no longer descriptive for what they experienced. People just use it for any form of lying, deception, or abuse now. Or sometimes just disagreements, like you said.
cgriswald 6y ago
Crook is a sort of synonym to criminal, thief, or con artist. It basically means someone who, while they maybe don’t commit a crime, do come about their means dishonestly. It’s maybe a little old-fashioned these days but not at all unusual. However, if someone says it and doesn’t know what it means, yeah, they’re probably sharing an emotional viewpoint or repeating someone else’s words or both.
- Clewza313 6y ago
  I think we all understand what it means, it's just one of those words that had kind of drifted off into obsolescence after Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon.
  - cgriswald 6y ago
    > ...it's just one of those words that had kind of drifted off into obsolescence after Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon. https://news.google.com/search?q=crook&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen https://news.google.com/search?q=crook&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=U... Excluding Crook as a name, it still seems to be in pretty common usage. It seems far more likely there is just regional variation. Most of the articles seem to be either from England or from the east coast. I heard the word in the Midwest all the time, although I can't say I've ever heard anyone on the west coast use the word.
redis_mlc 6y ago
> Hillary Clinton was a "crook" I think that started with her Whitewater investment, which turned out not be a huge deal overall. But ... 1) The Clinton family has accepted up to $2 billion for their foundation from overseas donors, mostly the Saudis, with the understanding that she would be running for President. In addition, Hillary has accepted a lot of money from Wall Street for speaking engagements at very high fees. 2) The basis for Trump's first impeachment appears to be Hillary paying off a British man to make false statements, and Joe Biden making false statements to get a FISA warrant. So crook is the correct term. Also, you're welcome to ask me anything the MSM is being evasive about.
schoen 6y ago
> Edit. Just caught myself say "parroting". That's one of those needlessly contentious or offensive words. It might be needlessly contentious or offensive, but not in the exact same way that the original post is talking about: although it's an insult, it doesn't signal an affiliation, and it isn't hard to understand properly without a lot of background or explanation. (You might signal an affiliation through your choice of whom you compare to parrots, or which ideas or concepts you compare to their squawks, but every audience will probably easily understand correctly what you meant by doing it!)
- exporectomy 6y ago
  O guess so. I was imagining how off-putting it would be to a reader who sees it as directed at themselves. Not quite the same as staking a standard position though.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

pwdisswordfish6 6y ago

> "crook" [...] Better to just not say anything if you're only parroting buzzwords. The buzzword of 2020/2021 appears to be "grifter" and its variations. On topic with the article and related to this is the word "dogwhistle". (The funny thing is that "dogwhistle" can itself be a dogwhistle.) It doesn't get used as much in my experience as "grifter", though, which is so wantonly thrown about nowadays that it may as well have no meaning. I avoid using both of these words. There are better ways to say it.

Trasmatta 6y ago
Dogwhistle is one of those phrases that has been so overused in the past year that it's largely lost its original meaning. It's like "gaslighting", which people seem to now use as a synonym for any kind of abuse. Or how people say "humblebrag" for regular brags.
- temp-dude-87844 6y ago
  'Dogwhistle' has drifted in its invocation in subtle but important ways. Originally it referred to the notion that some people would interpret coded language in the choice of phrasing or a hear a different connotation that the author did not intend. Then it was used as a descriptive accusation by outgroup members to claim that the speaker deliberately used coded language to appeal to an ingroup. Then it was used to describe the deliberate tactic of crafting word choice to appeal to a group while maintaining plausible deniability and avoiding alienating those not in the know. Then it was used to disparage certain groups by claiming that the group's writers and readers were communicating in coded language by tacit agreement, to affirm among each other positions the critics considered reprehensible. And finally it achieved self-reference by becoming a word some feel is being used as coded language by other groups to disparage them. It's unfortunate because each shade of meaning is a useful concept that would benefit from a succinct descriptor, but 'dogwhistle' has been churned through the semantic drift to where it's a word of subjective vitriol and not an objective descriptor of anything in particular.
- etblg 6y ago
  The use of "gaslighting" is the one that bugs me the most. Is this entity intentionally and repeatedly lying to you in a way to make you doubt your own sanity and rely on them for determining what is real or not ......or are they just disagreeing or disputing? Doesn't matter, if you call something gaslighting you get to be the victim and the other side can be labelled an abuser and who wants to side with an abuser?
  - Trasmatta 6y ago
    It's also a disservice to people who have actually been gaslit, because the term is no longer descriptive for what they experienced. People just use it for any form of lying, deception, or abuse now. Or sometimes just disagreements, like you said.

cgriswald 6y ago

Crook is a sort of synonym to criminal, thief, or con artist. It basically means someone who, while they maybe don’t commit a crime, do come about their means dishonestly. It’s maybe a little old-fashioned these days but not at all unusual. However, if someone says it and doesn’t know what it means, yeah, they’re probably sharing an emotional viewpoint or repeating someone else’s words or both.

Clewza313 6y ago
I think we all understand what it means, it's just one of those words that had kind of drifted off into obsolescence after Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon.
- cgriswald 6y ago
  > ...it's just one of those words that had kind of drifted off into obsolescence after Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon. https://news.google.com/search?q=crook&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen https://news.google.com/search?q=crook&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=U... Excluding Crook as a name, it still seems to be in pretty common usage. It seems far more likely there is just regional variation. Most of the articles seem to be either from England or from the east coast. I heard the word in the Midwest all the time, although I can't say I've ever heard anyone on the west coast use the word.

redis_mlc 6y ago

> Hillary Clinton was a "crook" I think that started with her Whitewater investment, which turned out not be a huge deal overall. But ... 1) The Clinton family has accepted up to $2 billion for their foundation from overseas donors, mostly the Saudis, with the understanding that she would be running for President. In addition, Hillary has accepted a lot of money from Wall Street for speaking engagements at very high fees. 2) The basis for Trump's first impeachment appears to be Hillary paying off a British man to make false statements, and Joe Biden making false statements to get a FISA warrant. So crook is the correct term. Also, you're welcome to ask me anything the MSM is being evasive about.

schoen 6y ago

> Edit. Just caught myself say "parroting". That's one of those needlessly contentious or offensive words. It might be needlessly contentious or offensive, but not in the exact same way that the original post is talking about: although it's an insult, it doesn't signal an affiliation, and it isn't hard to understand properly without a lot of background or explanation. (You might signal an affiliation through your choice of whom you compare to parrots, or which ideas or concepts you compare to their squawks, but every audience will probably easily understand correctly what you meant by doing it!)

exporectomy 6y ago
O guess so. I was imagining how off-putting it would be to a reader who sees it as directed at themselves. Not quite the same as staking a standard position though.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]