4 ms·
Given the costs involved in all the back and forth that a typical retraction involves, I can't see the journals wanting to deal with it.
by nitwit005 2y ago
Given the costs involved in all the back and forth that a typical retraction involves, I can't see the journals wanting to deal with it.
- tim333 2y agoI see the forbidden terms include "gender" and google scholar returns 5.3 million results with that. It's all a bit silly. Next they'll ban European languages for being gendered.
- sfeng 2y agoThey actually like male/female enforced gender. Maybe what they’ll do is add gender to English grammar!
- defrost 2y agoLa primera pregunta es: Que es mas macho, pineapple o knife? Well, let's see My guess is that a pineapple is more macho than a knife Si! Correcto! Pineapple es mas macho que knife La segunda pregunta es: Que es mas macho, lightbulb o schoolbus? Uh, lightbulb? No! Lo siento, Schoolbus es mas macho que lightbulb Gracias. And we'll be back in un momento ~ https://youtu.be/6mRq1xgKykM?t=95 https://youtu.be/6mRq1xgKykM?t=95
- tim333 2y agoI wonder how that'd go. Like in French "the book is on the table" is "le livre est sur la table" so I guess it'd become something like "he book is on she table"? We might need some new words. Or just steal the French ones "le book is on la table"? Vive la franglais!
- card_zero 2y agoOld English had gender, and the feminine definite article to match masculine the would be theo. (The whole concept of "the" was a late addition, mind you, and Middle English followed soon after and got rid of grammatical gender, apparently because an influx of Nordics had trouble with pronunciation.)
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- cowsandmilk 2y agoHalf the point of the order is Trump’s admin wants gendered language. That is: Pregnant person -> pregnant woman Pregnant people -> pregnant women
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]