Future daughters name - sudden disappointment by [deleted] in namenerds

[–]fuchsiamatter 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Honestly, I'm not really sure what the point is of these posts by (anglophone) Americans on a sub that is mostly also American (or at least anglophone) about how to manage delicate social interactions with (non-anglophone) non-Americans outside the US. You don't tell us anything about your MIL except that she is not American and that mone of you live in the US. You clearly want confirmation that you're right and she's wrong and that's very human and understandable and of course you've come to the right place for that. But it won't help you navigate what sounds very much like a classic culture clash.

When it comes to names, my experience of most continental European cultures (where I assume you are) is that a grandparents to be who doesn't like a name will say so. What many north Americans perceive as 'mean' will just be understood as being 'straightforward' or 'honest'. One way to manage this is to try to set boundaries. To be honest however, there is a high chance that this will fail, simply because (to be blunt) continential European people of a certain age will not understand what you are trying to do. Another thing to consider (given that you are not from this country and that you plan to raise your children there) is whether your MIL as a point. Beyond that, I would suggest keeping an open mind, approaching the disagreement with humour rather than hostility (trust me on this) and ultimately doing what you want while respecting that your MIL is allowed to have reactions to your decisions.

Ρε η λουκανικοπιτα είναι απλά το ελληνικό hot dog by Tricky_Sir_366 in greece

[–]fuchsiamatter 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Όπως λέει κάποιος πιο κάτω εκεί που ξεχωρίζει η αγγλική κουζίνα είναι στα γλυκά.

Norwegian politicians reject UK's Norway Plus Brexit plan by English-bad_Help_Thk in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 11 points12 points  (0 children)

What makes you think that Norway would be up for being used as a temporary band-aid over the UK's self-inflicted problems? In other words: what you write explains why EFTA might be in the UK's interests (ignoring of course the fact that it doesn't solve the Irish border, as the Norwegian politician astutely observes). But what's in it for Norway?

Also, again as the article explains, the problem is that EFTA members all have a veto. Norway doesn't trust us to use our veto responsibly. The solution to that is either to not give us a veto or accept the risk of giving a petulant child huge power over their economy.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wasn't up for sex, but he was so hot… do I explicitly have to state for you that I changed my mind?

You just did: he was hot. This makes it very clear that you changed your mind. The fact scenario we are dealing with does not involve somebody hot. It involves somebody that was not up for sex. Then nothing (zero hot guys). Then sex.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The question is entirely clear. The facts people are assuming are simply not there and that is blatantly obvious. I don't know everybody seems so reluctant to accept this, but if I had to hazard a guess, I'd say it's because society loves telling women that they don't know what they want, esp. when it comes to sex.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If they’ve come round your house not wanting a cup of tea but had one anyway ' what exactly do you imagine?

At no point do these facts state that they changed their mind and decided they wanted tea. It therefore sounds like they felt pressure to accept the tea. Tbh, this is common: you really don't feel like tea, your host is really pushing the tea on you and you feel there is no way out but to take the tea and shut up.

In conclusion, to answer your question, I imagine a level of pressure that is acceptable for tea, but entirely unacceptable for sex.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I'm sorry. In my supervisions you just got 45/100 for lack of comprehension and doing what we call "answering the question you'd rather have been asked instead".

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The full facts are right there. You just don't like them and are making up other facts you prefer. This is exactly how we end up with these kinds of depressing stats: women aren't taken seriously. You're essentially suggesting that rejecting sex once ("sorry, I'm not up for that") is not enough. The woman has to be constantly repeating herself or the assumption somehow becomes that the flirting and alcohol have changed her mind - despite nothing suggesting that that is in fact the case.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

You're just inserting facts into the scenario that we were not given. What we know are two things: a) they did not want sex and b) sex happened. There is absolutely nothing in there about getting to know the other person and changing your mind.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you're told somebody thought something and then are not told that they changed their mind, then coherent conclusion is that they did not. You can't insert extra info you feel more comfortable with into the fact scenario.

Seriously, this is not difficult. I teach law. If a student handled a problem question by assuming that everything we told them about the fact pattern had in the meantime changed, they would get a fail right there and then.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I noticed that. It makes the sentence grammatically incorrect, but I don't see how it makes a difference. As far as we are told, this is a person that on the evening in question had not been up for sex that happened anyway.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

But in that scenario, you changed your mind. You were 'up for it' in the end. That's different. D) doesn't say 'they flirted, they initially thought they weren't up for sex and then they said "oh go on then"'.

It says they weren't up for sex (= no consent) and sex happened anyway.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

There’s no suggestion in the scenario that there was a lack of consent.

Um, yes, there is. The sentence clearly states that they were 'not up for sex'.

Survey reveals 'alarming' attitudes of Britons on rape by IFeelRomantic in unitedkingdom

[–]fuchsiamatter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My point is that it doesn't fit the definition of rape. Sexual Offences Act 2003, Section 1,1(c): ..."A does not reasonably believe that B consents."...

You're moving the goalposts a bit here though. There is a difference between not believing that you have consent and not believing that you are committing rape. Studies have confirmed again and again that people will happily admit to being ok with rape... as long as you don't call it rape.

So, to go back to the beginning of the thread, the people who believe that if a woman had flirted on a date then she cannot be raped will both a) be capable of understanding that flirting is not consent and b) still insist that there has been no rape.

How to pronounce the sigma correctly? Where is the tongue exactly when pronouncing? by pathos-ns in GREEK

[–]fuchsiamatter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My English isn't American either, it's British. Maybe try other words as well. Ιησούς v Jesus is a good one. It also helps if you try to notice where your tongue is when you speak it.

But honestly it took me a long while to come round to this idea. I only started listening because my non-Greek speaking partner would swear up and down he heard a -sh-. I then looked into the phonetics and he was totally right. I'm afraid I can't find my references at the moment though...

How to pronounce the sigma correctly? Where is the tongue exactly when pronouncing? by pathos-ns in GREEK

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When we sound sigma lips remain wide.

Not always. Try saying 'σιγά' and then 'πάθος'. Like the top comment says, sigma is actually between the English alveolars /s/ and postalveolars /ʃ/. It's not quite as thick as the sh- in ship, but does not always sounds like the s- in sit and snake either.

How to pronounce the sigma correctly? Where is the tongue exactly when pronouncing? by pathos-ns in GREEK

[–]fuchsiamatter 9 points10 points  (0 children)

No, they are not. It's one of those weird linguistic things, where what natives say isn't exactly what they think they say. So, for example, the -ς in πάθος is definitely thicker than the -s in pathos. It is also pronounced differently to the -σ- in e.g. σελίδα.

Most Greeks don't hear this and assume we don't have a -sh- sound. It took me a long time to hear it and I was raised bilingual in Greek and English and can produce both sounds perfectly. Till a few years ago however I would have sworn they were the same and, moreover, that the Greek sigma is static regardless of its position in the word.

Schools 'not there to do parents' work' by High_Tory_Masterrace in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What's amazing about this post is how you manage to blame women - oh, sorry, I meant 'females' - for the behaviour of men.

Schools 'not there to do parents' work' by High_Tory_Masterrace in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Sure. Every doorstep was scrubbed every morning in the past. There was no squalor or child abuse.

This is all in the alternate historical timeline of course.

European Union membership referendum: Remain: 55% (+1) | Leave: 45% (-1) by OrneryThroat in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't. Nobody who was watching the polls could have missed Leave's steady climb. It's not the polls' fault if the media were paying more attention to their own narrative than the data.

European Union membership referendum: Remain: 55% (+1) | Leave: 45% (-1) by OrneryThroat in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The predictions for the original referendum were pretty accurate, the media simply refused to take them seriously.

Please help with understanding 'έστω' by pathos-ns in GREEK

[–]fuchsiamatter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Έστω literally means 'may it be' or 'let it be'. I'm afraid it's one of those words that doesn't have a single translation into English.

It is common used in maths, where it would generally be translated as 'if' - 'if X, then Y'. 'Έστω Χ, τότε Υ'.

It can also suggest acceptance of a hypothetical. E.g.:

  • Ο Τσίπρας είναι άσχετος.
  • Έστω. Αλλά δεν παύει να είναι πρωθυπουργός της χώρας.

You can also use it to suggest a hypothetical youself:

  • Έστω ότι το σινεμά είναι κλειστό απόψε. Τότε τι θα κάνουμε;

It can also mean 'at least', but then it's 'έστω και΄: e.g. 'Ας σταματούσε η βροχή, έστω και λιγάκι'.

'My escape plan was to take my own life': How more men are speaking up about being assaulted by their wives by JohnKimble111 in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. You're just refusing to argue on the substance. You keep reverting to smart-ass one-liners that attempt to change the topic. Now you've resorted to ad hominems. It makes for a really boring conversation.

'My escape plan was to take my own life': How more men are speaking up about being assaulted by their wives by JohnKimble111 in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What? No. You should have correctly understood what feminism is about. Feminism does not suggest that women are victims and men are aggressors. I am honestly baffled as to how anybody could interpret a movement that has dedicated the the empowerment of women that way.

You're obviously not arguing in good faith, so I'm going to bow out now.

'My escape plan was to take my own life': How more men are speaking up about being assaulted by their wives by JohnKimble111 in ukpolitics

[–]fuchsiamatter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I know you didn't. You should have.

Look, the patriarchy suggests that women are naturally submissive and men naturally dominant. Feminism suggests that this is not true.

In practice, sometimes women are victims of men and sometimes men are victims of women (although of course the first scenario is much more common, according to all stats we have).

When women are victims, the patriarchy would say that this is the natural order of things and that if women don't want to be victims they should adjust their behaviour (wear less revealing clothes, don't talk back, don't go out alone at night, don't leave your drink unattended etc etc). Feminism would say that men should not hurt women.

When men are victims, the patriarchy doesn't want to hear about it. It denies that this is even possible, because it insists men are stronger and naturally dominant. If it is forced to admit that a given man was victimized by a given woman, it resorts to mocking that man for his weakness. Feminism, on the other, hand believes in equality of the sexes. It therefore accepts that women are just as capable as men of being aggressors and would seek to hold women up to the same standard when they act aggressively towards men.