snooggums

Yeah, leading with the important part so the reat of it has context seems to work a lot better for a lot more people in my experience. Especially in your example where you are trying to front load the thing to do followed by the thing not to do. That way they don’t jump to speculation halfway through the sentence :)

On a somewhat nonscientifically aupported personal observation, if the sentence structure has a ‘but’ in the middle the audience is very likely to start mentally guessing what is coming up and will have more trouble listening to what it being said. It can often sound like a rug pulling moment, where what they thought was true is suddenly switched up and most people don’t like that. So if thinking ahead it is better to reverse a sentence like in that example to avoid the middle ‘but’.

Negative Ghostrider, doggo comes first!

You guys are having conversations where someone gets to the point at the beginning?

I usually get a meandering barely tangential story that is supposed to be context but is irrelevant and gets in the way of communicating their simple point.

“snooggums, are you able to take off work tomorrow? I was walking the dog and ran into Cindy. You know Cindy, Bob’s daughter? She went to Kansas State and majored in chemistry, but was never that into it. Anyway, so Cindy was talking about how they painted their house last year and the contractor wasn’t someone you would want to work with because when she talked to them he said that he wasn’t sure that the work was going well and he wanted to follow up to discuss the work with him. But then he said that it was ok and it all worked out. On the way back the dog had a limp, can you take her to the vet?”

Sorry, you have to picture a similar meandering explanation for something as that whole story has filled my brain for the morning.

If they didn’t interrupt you would still be having two conversations since they misunderstood what you were trying to say, but it would take longer to catch on.

They do have unrealistic expectations.

Those might include standards, limited preferences, or an expectation that a relationship is just going to magically happen despite not doing the things that are necessary for a relationship to start.

Most of the people that fit your description that I knew in the 90s had relationships with other outcasts, the people they hung out with. Hell, I probably could have fit that description and had no issues dating!

‘Normal women’ includes all kinds of women, but the context implies that they are choosing some kind of stereotypical type of woman which is limiting their dating pool. Their bitterness and hatred comes from not changing their behavior to attract the type of women they were interested in.

It is not illegal everywhere.

Nobody is celibate against their will. They might have difficulty getting into relationships, but they are also choosing not to use the services of sex workers.

Incels are defined by how they think, not what they are.

Adding “those” in front also alienates them further. So by saying “those people”, you are distancing yourself from them, despite them being your family.

Great observation!

“Those people” can be a racist or classist dog whistle, but isn’t always, and also there isn’t really an alternative.

The vast majority of the time ‘they’ or ‘them’ works in the same sentence as ‘those people’ when refering a goup since you already need context for who you are referring to. I can’t even think of an example where they or them doesn’t fit.

Description of a group of white people from Georgia.

• I heard they like fried chicken.

• I heard those people like fried chicken.

Hell, the second one sounds racist even after making it clear I was talking about white people, and I typed the words!

Baseball cap this morning.

Hats help with avoiding sunburn on my bald head, and I usually wear ball caps because they are small and easy to tuck away when not needed into a bag, backpack, or other small storage spaces.

For example, one time I was talking about how my sister and her family/household travel often, saying, “Those people travel a lot,” and the person repeated those people and gave a slight laugh. I’m wondering if I may be giving some sort of unintentional implied message when I use that word.

I joke around friends who accidentally phrase things in ways that could sound like bigotry/racism if taken out of context, and it sounds like that it what the person was laughing about.

‘Those people’, when used while judging or looking down on somebody is a common way for bigots and racists to avoid using slurs around non-bigots/racists. Something like “The park was a lot more fun before those people showed up.” while nodding in the direction of some people with darker skin. Or saying that ‘those people’ are doing something unacceptable.

It isn’t a people vs persons thing, it is specifically the phrase ‘those people’.

I nominate beigepilled.

So blackpilled = incelpilled?

A big part of where she excelled in votes was because she spent too much time in safe states and didn’t spend a lot of time campaigning in the states that ended up being decided on thin margins.

They have a concept of a birth.

They are also against contraception, because they are pro forced birth.

They are pro forced birth. They don’t care about infants, children, or adults.

Yeah, the South Park episode was based on a true story.