There's no 'we'. Just you, your smug ignorance and your superstitious panic.https://twitter.com/TheAtlantic/status/1047915824646905856 …
-
-
ah, unsurprising an era of "theory derived more from Biblical exegesis than from empirical study and which dictates one must have sth organic put up one's bum at prescribed intervals and be fed bland crackers to ensure one doesn't ever fap" doesn't seem to trouble her much, then
-
btw, surely we all do still have some abstract awareness that journalistic "royal we" isn't in itself proof that whatever follows is some hideous kultur-kommissar bullshit but, yaknow, statistically, it is *just about close enough* ...
-
it's gotten to the point where if a headline so much as *starts with a first-person plural pronoun* my eyes are already glazing over
-
I think it has to do with knowing your audience. The Atlantic, for instance, probably has a good idea of its demographics, so the “we” is a legitimate cultural delineator.
-
sure, it's just that one finds oneself just outside the delineated circle only so often before one eventually stops assuming this must have been some sort of mistake or oversight on the authors' part
-
Is it a mistake? Do you read the Atlantic? I’m reasonably certain Rev doesn’t, except when an item to critique swims cross stream.
-
If the headline accurately captures their 'we', their demographic has become much more poorly educated, as compared to say ten years ago.
-
I believe that’s quite likely, and fits with my own casual observations. I didn’t know milk used to have brains in it, though.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.