TIL that some languages apparently have words inherently differentiating one's status as a citizen or resident of the entity versus a member of a particular ethnic or cultural group? I don't quite grasp the whole thing, although I heard the point being made. What's interesting to me is a) that there is such a thing, which seems very revealing of something about a culture that would need such concepts built into the language, and b) that there seem to be people who think it's inaccurate to interpret the word choice as meaningful. Firstly, since languages have all sorts of concepts built into them, many very specific to their primary culture of use, it seems reasonable that such a thing could exist. Not that I would have thought of it before, since I'm not from a culture where that sort of subtlety functions. Secondly, if that is, indeed, the subtlety of the word choices, where one essentially and inherently includes people, and the other excludes, then I'd kind o...
So this is like man flu, or something?
ReplyDeleteI had a classmate in middle school with alopecia areata and she was very clear that the way some people treated her over it was Not Fun.
ReplyDeleteOn the whole, men are the ones who have the higher percentage risk of going bald. I mean, men can get breast cancer too, but that’s rarely talked about in articles due to,the fact that women are the ones who have the higher percentage risk.
ReplyDeleteAs a dude, you sort of become aware pretty early on that how you look doesn't matter very much. The one exception, though, is baldness. The consensus is that if you go bald, you're fucked.
ReplyDelete