arbitrarilyHigh Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
1	Time magazine's editorial includes a nasty quote from an MRA. One problem: it's not real. insults are based on reducing an individual based on a trait that is seen as lessening in some capacity-- and where do we cross the line on saying that an insult is extra offensive or just doing it's regular purpose in trying to debase an individual? I agree with you here about the basic purpose of insults — expressing some negative emotional sentiment (anger, contempt, disapproval, whatever) in a way that has social significance, by implying that the subject of the insult is in some way lesser.…	/r/MensRights	02/06/14 03:59 AM
1	Time magazine's editorial includes a nasty quote from an MRA. One problem: it's not real. Ok, I hadn't thought of that interpretation, but I could see that being valid, with "asshole" being somewhat analogous to "cocksucker". But I don't think that's correct; the etymology of "asshole" is more closely tied with feces (and associated slang: "shithead", "piece of crap", "shithole", etc).	/r/MensRights	02/06/14 12:03 AM
1	Time magazine's editorial includes a nasty quote from an MRA. One problem: it's not real. No; what subset would "asshole" be based on?	/r/MensRights	30/05/14 09:06 PM