pillbinge

pillbinge t1_j9l4n06 wrote

There’s no answer here that you can trust or bank on. Just not how it works. Only thing I can say is that if I were hiring someone, I would take off points for blue hair. Nothing to do with conformity, but adults who are still trying to be anti-conformity or make a statement are just tiresome.

You don’t have to like my statement. I had blue hair once. And red. I was also a kid and only had something to prove to other kids.

There are tons of people here who’d see blue hair as a perk. Usually goes hand in hand with too many rainbow flags and stickers, or a penchant for working in the arts. But not everyone.

Edit: to follow up because I'm giving you a real answer - these down-votes and upvotes mean nothing. It's people railing against the system. It's proof that this sub is going to tell you something you want to hear but shouldn't accept, because you're asking the question for a reason. Do with that what you will, but the area is not what so many people make it out to be. They think that this blue state means everything's like we're living on one giant campus and college never ended. I'm trying to get you employed. They're trying to cope.

−12

pillbinge t1_j9hs39a wrote

I understand you're not referring to that specific sub. I'm putting out a general call to show real intentions. Keep in mind that this is all read by other people.

You don't have to give links to pages outside of Reddit as proof - whether here (not advised) or in a message (doable, but I get any trepidation). You just can't carry on like you have proof - especially if you're just going to post the exact article I referenced very early on.

It's obvious why dipshit White supremacists would want to "purify" English. The problem is that I have no issue with that alignment, given that English is one of many languages of Europe, and English itself isn't a default state of Whiteness. English belongs to many people - many who aren't White. That is well understood. You are understood. It's just not a very appealing exchange when you don't have real, direct proof. I need that.

0

pillbinge t1_j9hrn8l wrote

>Now I’m sitting at my desk making overtime

Doesn't beat sitting at your desk at home making full pay because you're on February vacation lmao. How'd you even manage to fuck that one up?

I'd also consider hesitate before telling others to "simmer down" while you try to brag about your pay (and then fail, somehow). That's even sadder than before.

0

pillbinge t1_j9g20ah wrote

I totally get it, and feel free to look into users you think may be doing that. But this is all very "out there". I'd like actual proof, though. And since this conversation is happening in view of others, they need it as well.

I've had nearly this exact conversation about three times now and it's never gone further than this point. Anglish doesn't exist outside these limited websites. We don't meet in person. "Real life" isn't an excuse not to show proof. I just really want that proof.

1

pillbinge t1_j9fkjw3 wrote

Okay - but where? They certainly aren't in the sub itself, and if they are, none of their dogshit beliefs come up. You don't have to link it here but feel free to message me instances of it.

Otherwise this is all just fear voiced as a solid opinion.

1

pillbinge t1_j9dwa0a wrote

This is the wrong sub to ask. And whatever the law says, take it with a grain of salt. There's still more context. The thing you're looking for are "fighting words". Fighting words might defend you when called to stand for what you've done, but they don't justify anything. Not legally. No one is encouraged to fight.

Bottom line, usually, is that you're responsible for your own actions. You can't batter someone just because they said you were fugly. You might get away with it if they screamed the n-word at you. But these aren't hard-and-fast rules, so the general rule is, don't fight.

17

pillbinge t1_j9dvsvi wrote

We don't. It's mainly a fun experiment to look into the etymology of words outside of Greek and Latin, introduced by way of French in 1066, to see what words either already existed, or what words we could use now.

And just to check: you know the Anglo-Saxons weren't synonymous with all of Europe, right? The language most Anglish adherents rail against is French, which is also very White. Greek and Latin - amazingly White. In fact, White Supremacists have a sort of affection for antiquity that isn't shared with Anglish at all.

A lot of words, especially from science, came from scientists coming up with words on the fly. Neat, but not very rooted in the vernacular. I can personally attest to how that affects us because it's always these types of words that students struggle with and have to learn. It's why English has spelling bees for its own people. It's easier to teach "bird study" than "ornithology", as the classic example goes. These are the kinds of words my students who are learning English struggle with. I don't consider making English easier to learn for non-White people to be very supremacist.

And for anyone still reading: words from Latin before 1066 are usually fine, as long as the concepts are unique. But plenty of Old English words existed for concepts we have now. They were just replaced with French for no reason other than classist belief.

1

pillbinge t1_j9c0b2i wrote

You don't know anything about the students I've had throughout my career - but if you feel that bad, get into teaching. Right now, not many can hack it. Those that can still leave for greener pastures. Talking to someone and then spinning it like it's character trait to then respond is bizarre.

>Good luck with whatever you’re trying to accomplish.

What, outside of being rated proficient with one exemplary on my eval? Definitely. lmao

1

pillbinge t1_j9baftb wrote

I've seen that reaction, but nothing of substance when it comes to claims. It's usually someone who Googled it and ran across that SPLC article, which is quaint, but stupid. White supremacists love Rome and Latin - that sub does not. The idea that language needn't be convoluted to gatekeep shouldn't scream radical identity to you.

What in particular makes you think that sub has anything to do with race?

1

pillbinge t1_j9awz1k wrote

Whoops! Yes, it got rid of the singular. I was just thinking about the plural of "y'all" since it basically moves "you" to the singular" and creates a plural in its stead. I meant to say it switched over but had a crossed wire. There are some movements to get back "thou" in some cases. Probably a sub. I spend time on r/anglish as well, and you have big advocates there.

2

pillbinge t1_j9at3bt wrote

Reply to comment by lufecaep in Tweksberry, MA? by awaythrowing333

That implies "guys" needs to be replaced when it doesn't.

The real issue is that English got rid of the plural second-person. So you know what's really acceptable (and I'm hardly a prescriptivist)?

Just "you".

−1

pillbinge t1_j9aq1w6 wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Tweksberry, MA? by awaythrowing333

Sounds like you can't go on social media without being wrong. A lot of people have that problem, unfortunately. But young people aren't using it by virtue of being young. I get it - you don't have the perspective necessary. It isn't your fault.

−10

pillbinge t1_j9apw58 wrote

Reply to comment by GarbageFile13 in Tweksberry, MA? by awaythrowing333

Which is fine. My cousins from Alabama say it all the time too. They're from Alabama, though. If they started saying "wicked" or something else obvious to our region, I'd raise an eyebrow at least.

2

pillbinge t1_j9alypt wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Tweksberry, MA? by awaythrowing333

They aren't. It's from social media. A middle aged woman who browses TikTok is more likely to send that in a work email than I am to hear from one of my students.

−14