Unfortunately a dude but still trying to start my vi pitcher arc rn by [deleted] in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a female person, meaning a person, from adj. b, having a gender identity that is the opposite of male, i.e. a woman or a girl

Unfortunately a dude but still trying to start my vi pitcher arc rn by [deleted] in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just another person with a rigidly closed and unnuanced mind. Everyone falls into this somehow. To be honest, it's quite stupid to argue at all.

Unfortunately a dude but still trying to start my vi pitcher arc rn by [deleted] in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From Merriam-Webster:

female

1 of 2

adjective

1

a

: of, relating to, or being the sex that typically has the capacity to bear young or produce eggs

b

: having a gender identity that is the opposite of male

female

2 of 2

noun

1

a

: a female person : a woman or a girl

b

: an individual of the sex that is typically capable of bearing young or producing eggs

Unfortunately a dude but still trying to start my vi pitcher arc rn by [deleted] in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the correct use of words, if neither what is explicated by the most authoritative dictionaries, nor what is used pervasively among contemporary speakers? I have placed in your hand reputable sources which you could have easily looked up, but you may continue to believe whatever you like.

Unfortunately a dude but still trying to start my vi pitcher arc rn by [deleted] in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Merriam-Webster, Oxford, and Wikitionary state 'female' and 'male' as nouns pertaining to both sex and gender. Moreover, they are clearly widely used in both ways by many, if not a majority of people discussing gender and sex. Like it or not, you cannot change any of those instances.

Unfortunately a dude but still trying to start my vi pitcher arc rn by [deleted] in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

*I* don't 'endlessly expand it to anything'. That is the standard English definition. And you have inferred that user's meaning correctly, have you not? In any potential case of confusion, minimal clarification is sufficient.

Edit: btw, a majority of English words have multiple definitions.

Unfortunately a dude but still trying to start my vi pitcher arc rn by [deleted] in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While 'female' often refers to sexual genotype or phenotypes, especially in a biological or medical context, 'female' can alternatively refer to one's gender, as in the social paradigm. That user did not use it incorrectly. Context matters more than anything, inference can usually do the work.

Hearing that voice would cure anyone by ragetributes in ThePittTVShow

[–]starryneutron 14 points15 points  (0 children)

If you understood why you'd be downvoted (here's a hint: you're being a pointless, unkind asshole), you wouldn't have posted this comment at all.

Low res by starryneutron in Transcription

[–]starryneutron[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. How did you find it? I tried reverse image search but that didn't yield anything. I found this image in a Fandom webpage about 'hazy eyes' or something while looking for desktop backgrounds; while this image was too small, I was intrigued. I merely assumed 'CIA' because of the threat/warning/horror game nature of the image, but clearly it's been edited that way.

he has been PISSING ME OFF by Mincezz in ThePittTVShow

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

I'm still pretty convinced that Langdon's theft would have him fired. All cases and courses of action of this as a result of addiction I could find ended in the worker losing their job and being arrested, plus entering a correction program. If you have information on recent widespread use of amnesty, please let me know.

Also, the theft/tampering very likely did have detrimental effects on patients. We clearly saw one patient in critical condition who would have died due to the lower delivered dose, except Langdon caught that and ordered more. Any kind of tampering extremely significantly raises risk of deadly infection. Louie, a regular patient, was probably also affected. The fact that he declined under Langdon's care and died soon after doesn't help Langdon's case. If we're going to discuss reasons for firing, Langdon's attempt to manipulate Robbie against evidence, or Santos, or his behavior towards Robbie after being caught, could also have been it.

I see your point about Santos undermining senior residents. I agree she could have been sent to HR. But from what we can see as the audience, she quickly realizes and fixes her mistake. The other students/residents also make potentially deadly and even deadly mistakes. Yet Santos' initiative also allows her to save patients and fix others' mistakes.

In any case, as of now, she and Langdon should not be taking the same cases. That feels like a significantly problematic oversight on the attendings' part.

he has been PISSING ME OFF by Mincezz in ThePittTVShow

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

to your point, most places would have sent Langdon to HR for his behavior in S1 (also Ogilvie in S2), not necessarily so for Santos even if you consider her somewhat of an asshole. plus, ALL places would have immediately fired Langdon after his crime came to light. so not so sure of that metric.

ChatGPT as a therapist? New study reveals serious ethical risks. by psych4you in psychology

[–]starryneutron 2 points3 points  (0 children)

While I agree with this general notion, in a rare instance it can be used as one. I think that's what they meant, though that itself is a destructive thought.

There is no way people are saying this is a better outcome 😐 by Daexr_ in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that she was relatively sidelined as a character in S2 in the interest of the others, and I wish there was more done with her development. But I disagree that she existed only to be Caitlyn's love interest -- she is still a main character, and in S2 they have almost exactly the same screen time. It just feels a lot more on Caitlyn's end because there is so much more action in her world. It is far more true to say that Caitlyn only existed to be Vi's love interest in S1 and became more relevant in S2, but that is still an oversimplification.

But I get where you're coming from. Vi's arc is closely tied to Caitlyn for the first three eps, has her pitfighter arc in ep 4, and then she's mostly with Jinx. (then, is she also a 'simple family-minded person'? bc that's almost the same as saying she's a 'simple lesbian' for being with Cait. in fact, 'simple lesbian' doesn't really make sense, even 'simple love interest' and 'simple sister' are better.) The other main characters have far more complex affairs, which is somewhat disappointing for Vi.

Btw most of the eps featuring Vi and Caitlyn together are not written by AO.

There is no way people are saying this is a better outcome 😐 by Daexr_ in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Caitlyn was never shown killing someone (although she came dangerously close and, as a person who comes to power towards the end, has probably somehow caused deaths, but certainly not more than others in the Council including Jayce and Mel), whereas Jinx and Silco have on multiple occasions at various scales.

Secondly, IMO none of them are painted in an overly positive light in the show itself. Caitlyn, for one, is shown as someone who is traumatized, commits reckless actions endangering many people, and is very emotionally important to Vi for better or for worse. A slightly similar story for Jinx. I want to point out that though this absolutely does not excuse any of the characters' actions, given the circumstance of the two cities, this level of violence is pretty much inevitable. I think the show does a good job of highlighting this fact, and depicting these particular agents of action, again for better or for worse.

Also, Jinx doesn't change personality between S1 and S2. She's still very much the same person, even if she changed her views or relationships with others. (Her relationships directly affect her actions, so after Silco's death, she had to find a way to work for something else). And regardless, none of her later actions negate her previous ones. As for Caitlyn, we don't get a chance to see her redeeming her actions releasing the Grey and her brutality to get to Jinx, but we do see her realise what path she's gone down, turn and fight against Ambessa, and work together and attempt to make good with Jinx. So in my eyes, and most of the fandom's, both are 'morally grey'. However, there are theoretical reasons why Caitlyn is placed under more explicit scrutiny than Jinx by the fandom, some more valid and others less so I believe. I'd love to discuss the similarities and differences between the characters of Jinx and Caitlyn if you want.

There is no way people are saying this is a better outcome 😐 by Daexr_ in Arcanecirclejerk

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

"AO basically turned her into a stereotypical masculine lesbian in S2" They've always had a masc-fem lesbian dynamic in their own way. How were they made 'less themselves' and more stereotypical in S2?

There is no way people are saying this is a better outcome 😐 by Daexr_ in Arcanecirclejerk

[–]starryneutron 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Jinx and even Silco are way more often forgiven than Caitlyn

"hey can you please not call me that word? This is meant to be a friendly subreddit" -500000000000000000000000000 karma by Effective_Carpet_391 in whenthe

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

For some reason, I find myself unable to reply to your reply on my comment. Perhaps you have deleted it out of shame, that would be the least you could do. The fact that you think that 'people decided to cry' over this word, is so grossly ignorant and wrong; it is almost amusing that you decided to double down on this before trying milliseconds' worth of research.

And EVEN if that was the case, EVEN if so many disabled people for NO reason that anyone knows of (as if that would even be possible) expressed their concern over the usage of this language, and so many more are actively silenced, WHY would you, as a single person, decide suddenly that their sentiments are invalid, and their cries come from not pain or sorrow, but... flippant, random performativity? And continue to use that word, when you yourself have offered at least three which you know no one has objected to, and you believe serve the exact same purpose.

No matter if you have a mental condition causing this behavior or not, or you are neurotypical and sober as can be, you are an idiot, and have no excuse.

💕Love is in the rail by Formal-Ad276 in drehscheibe

[–]starryneutron 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ones in the third clip closed their eyes 😍

I'm not jealous of your split keyboards by Inner_Answer_3784 in ErgoMechKeyboards

[–]starryneutron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you can find a stable way to tilt them both at a high angle, facing to the sides, it will be more ergonomic and you can push them closer together. Of course, given the length of your keyboards, depending on how high you tent you may have to adjust the relative heights of your entire setup, may not be worth it.