It’s not meant to be a stereotype applied to all men, just the a thing that some men do. It happens when a man assumes, perhaps subconsciously, that the woman he is speaking to is his intellectual inferior and would surely benefit from his opinion on whatever topic without any regard to her possible expertise on the topic, or even his own lack thereof. I’ve rarely witnessed it myself, but know women who have had to put up with it. Stereotypeing all men as “manslainers” would be rude, but mocking the men who actually behave that way is cool with me.

Oh yeah, rub my face in those gorgeous technicalities. You want to mock my logical fallacy? Do it. Point out my fallacy and laugh; I can take it.

If the politicians and bureaucrats that Trump and friends pushed out are like murky swamp water, then the ones he brought in are like raw sewage, so I always said that he only wanted to “drain the swamp” so he’d have room to pump in said raw sewage.

I would argue that doesn’t qualify as trivial.

As a Millennial, I’m now too old to tell the difference.

Domestic worker isn’t exactly a euphemism here. It refers to the type of work done, ie someone who does house-work. Slave refers the situation the work is done under.

I completely agree that the word slave accurately describes their situation and is conspicuously absent from the article.

This is it exactly. “I am at home” describes your location. “I am home” describes your current state.

Thanks, that is a better word there.

I can see the argument that it has a sort of world model, but one that is purely word relationships is a very shallow sort of model. When I am asked what happens when a glass is dropped onto concrete, I don’t just think about what I’ve heard about those words and come up with a correlation, I can also think about my experiences with those materials and with falling things and reach a conclusion about how they will interact. That’s the kind of world model it’s missing. Material properties and interactions are well enough written about that it ~~simulates ~~ emulates doing this, but if you add a few details it can really throw it off. I asked Bing Copilot “What happens if you drop a glass of water on concrete?” and it went into excruciating detail about how the water will splash, mentions how it can absorb into it or affect uncured concrete, and now completely fails to notice that the glass itself will strike the concrete, instead describing the chemistry of how using “glass (such as from the glass of water)” as aggregate could affect the curing process. Having a purely statistical/linguistic world model leaves some pretty big holes in its “reasoning” process.

Now I want to know if DeVinci had any rivalries with other artists that we could bring back.

Pidgeon -> Parrot -> Turkey

I think it would be Pigeon -> Parrot -> Pheasant -> Peacock, but then I don’t know a lot about Pokemon.