News:

Not just a bunch of "Trotskyist, car-hating, Hugo Chavez idolising, newt-fancying hypocrites and bendy bus fetishists."

Main Menu

Who are "They"?

Started by AFK, December 21, 2006, 06:59:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

P3nT4gR4m

Quote from: LMNO on December 22, 2006, 01:00:38 PM

anthropomorphication (christ, is that a word?)


Anthropomorphosis?

(have to admit tho I like yours better)

I'm up to my arse in Brexit Numpties, but I want more.  Target-rich environments are the new sexy.
Not actually a meat product.
Ass-Kicking & Foot-Stomping Ancient Master of SHIT FUCK FUCK FUCK
Awful and Bent Behemothic Results of Last Night's Painful Squat.
High Altitude Haggis-Filled Sex Bucket From Beyond Time and Space.
Internet Monkey Person of Filthy and Immoral Pygmy-Porn Wart Contagion
Octomom Auxillary Heat Exchanger Repairman
walking the fine line line between genius and batshit fucking crazy

"computation is a pattern in the spacetime arrangement of particles, and it's not the particles but the pattern that really matters! Matter doesn't matter." -- Max Tegmark

AFK

I think everyone has made some really good points.  I think in large part "they" has become a sort-of referential cop-out.  But, I think it largely gets ignored anyway.  You hear it all the time from talking heads and pundits.  But then again there are lots of referential terms that end up being like that.  I think of when the Republicans and Democrats start going at one another.  "The Democrats are..."  or "The Republicans are..."  lumping them all together when it is clear there are members of each party who don't always deserve to be lumped with the whole. 

Of course in the media, soundbytes are gold.  Long-winded explications and explanations are forbidden.  I think people in other realms of life and society fall into it as well.  To save time, among other things.
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.