3 ms·
It's just a simple test - if all permutations of some situation lead to the same outcome, then the outcome cannot be said to be caused by the situation.
by kkoncevicius 5y ago
It's just a simple test - if all permutations of some situation lead to the same outcome, then the outcome cannot be said to be caused by the situation.
- animal_spirits 5y agoYeah but, how would you even test this realistically? its just a hypothetical situation. You can't change the etymology of a word and test the outcome
- kkoncevicius 5y agoAll I am saying is that it's just a matter of perspective. If we have a separate word for a group of women that can be seen in both ways: either as a special treatment for women (the group of women stands out when no men are present) or as a special treatment for men (the mixed groups is referred to in masculine terms). Personally, I am not sure how these linguistic details evolved, but I wouldn't be surprised that the original intention was to place a special emphasis on women. Because the word for a mixed group should have been "invented" first, and then a separate word for women added on top. But don't quote me on that. But there is an interesting precedent about dual-words (in the languages that have them), where you use a special form of a word to denote groups of two people. And according to research I've seen those words were added after a word for a group of any size was available - to place a special emphasis on a group of two.
- alexfrydl 5y agoIf these “permutations” only exist inside of your own brain, that only proves something about you, not reality. Really, none of the permutations exist. Very few women unironically care that the word “woman” has the word “man” inside it. You're making up things to be mad about.
- jedi_stannis 5y agoWhat if there was a word for a group of men, a word for a group of woman and a non-gendered word for a mixed group?