Jump to content

Amina Sopwith

Resident
  • Content Count

    964
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,560 Excellent

1 Follower

About Amina Sopwith

Recent Profile Visitors

565 profile views
  1. I've never seen you in full, but I've always thought your profile pic was beautiful.
  2. I approve. It's the best method of disposal, given that that type of paper is a bit rough and uncomfortable, and has a tendency to get stuck in the U bend.
  3. You would love my friend who once had a conversation with the Jews for Jesus when they were recruiting in the city centre. He counted up how many Jewish friends he had and asked them what the exchange rate would be.
  4. That's why an awful lot of people with legitimate claims don't do it. I was once asked in a job interview whether I planned to have any children. Stupidly gave the honest answer that I hadn't decided. It's an illegal question, but I wanted the job. It went to a man with less experience and fewer qualifications. I'm sure they'd say that they genuinely preferred him for other reasons. I just want to know if they asked him about his family plans.
  5. That's not the reason for my choice of first name (doesn't work with my accent anyway) but I like it nonetheless. Curse you, Red Baron!
  6. That is also a dictionary. As such, its job is to record language, not police it. Though someone does need to stop people posting new entries to create new definitions for their ex's name.
  7. They don't cow. They accept that language evolves over time for various reasons ("A good wif was ther, of biside Bathe/But she was somdel deef, and that was scathe") and their job is to record language as it is. This process does not have an inherent moral value to it, though we can tell a lot about a society about how its language evolves. Why, I wonder, do so many words such as "courtesan", "mistress" and "madam", once merely the feminine counterpart to a masculine noun, become sexualised and even pejorative? But it's not the evolution itself that is the problem. "Gay" no longer means bright and cheerful and a toilet is no longer a covering drape. If society at large accepts certain words to have a certain meaning, that is what they mean and dictionary editors have a duty to record this accurately. (Funnily enough, this means that, rather than being the official authority on what's correct, the OED is usually a bit behind the times before it legitimises word usages that are established in practical terms anyway.) The constant evolution of language is precisely the reason for the term "Oxford Living Dictionaries".
  8. In my old SL life, I was a store model/customer assistant. There were several of us and one registered bot who was on permanent duty upstairs. Her profile stated that she was a bot, she had "bot" in her name and the store owner told us that she was a bot when we had our training. One day, the store owner gave us a little questionnaire to fill in about how it was all going. An alarming number of my fellow employees complained that the av upstairs was unresponsive and never spoke to us or even to customers. Several wanted her to be fired. And people would ask me why I was quite happy with my job and never wished to pursue SL supermodel superstardom....
  9. I had a number of people inform me that because I wouldn't voice for them, I was clearly a man. Someone's made a comment along those lines in another thread I'm ignoring...it's not directed at me personally but I'm included in the target of his error-ridden ire. I'm actually very happy to voice for good people, have even sung on occasion. But for the same reason I didn't put out a nice nesty box of picnic food when I had an ant infestation, I don't voice for entitled c**kwombles. It doesn't really bother me if they decide I am a man. At this particular time of the month, I wish they were right.
  10. And King Charlie Brooker (all hail) had a few funny things to say about him too. He once referred to him as "Sir Flappy Tongued Bumface". I can't find the article online but I've got it in one of his books upstairs.
  11. As Charlie says, it's an amorphous concept that means different things to different people.
  12. It's old, but I think you would like this article by Charlie Brooker (all hail) giving his views on Justin Timberlake's claim to have brought sexy back. "I mean Jesus Christ, Timberlake: sexy isn't something you can withdraw from the market then subsequently revive, like Texan bars or Prime Suspect. No. It's an amorphous concept which means different things to different people. There's no regulatory body monitoring its supply, Opec-style - and even if there was, no one would put you in charge of it anyway, you snide, self-satisfied, stinkarsed, jigging little stoat." https://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/sep/15/tvandradio.charliebrooker
  13. Absolutely. That's why I was very careful to state that I know that internalised misogyny, though it's a related phenomenon, was not what was happening here. It's more a case of women being, very understandably, extremely anxious not to give credence to what apparently looks like a spurious claim. They don't want to give any ammunition to the "this never happens and it's all a crock" people. Totally makes sense. But I can understand why, to someone who's not been on the receiving end of that, or at least not to the same extent and with all the associated misogynistic stereotypes, it could look like a simple women-on-woman pile-on. I'd be interested to know how much bad feeling would be generated against this woman if her claim is thrown out, against how much bad feeling there is against the existing unchallenged sexism in the workplace. I've no way of measuring it empirically but I think it would be interesting to know.
  14. I know you're great, don't worry, and I apologise if my post read as a personal attack on you - it certainly wasn't intended that way. I just wanted to offer an explanation and context for what you were seeing. (I could, at this point, go into a Gor rant, but luckily for you lot I've got plans this evening and don't have time.) If this claim is as full of s*** as people say it is (I've not read it and I don't know much about LL's history and internal workings, so I really can't say), then hopefully it will be rejected. And I am very sure that the claimant will receive a great deal of backlash for it.
×
×
  • Create New...