Comment on Snowflake is such a weird insult as it seems to imply it's best to just be like everyone else

tobogganablaze@lemmus.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

• Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Wikipedia and most dictionary definitions talk about uniqueness. Each snowflake is unique. That’s what most people mean by it.

  source

  • JamesNZ@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    I think you are cherry picking. It says it means both. My 5c: If you think you are unique and you don’t give a fuck about what other people think (example would be a goth or punk imo), then not a snowflake. If you melt down at the slightest touch over others not being like the status quo (example would be a Karen imo). Not a snowflake. If you think you are different, and melt down as soon as someone chalanges that difference (example vegan yelling at someone buying a steak imo) then snowflake.

    source

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I haven’t claimed it doesn’t imply fragility too. Just that the uniqueness is the primary meaning of it - thus the term snowflake. “I’m unique and thus deserving of special treatment”

      If it was primarily about fragility then we’d probably be using some other term as that is not generally the first feature that comes to mind about snowflakes.

      source

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        I feel like you googled the word and consider that truth without really looking at the nuance of how the phrase evolved.

        Long ago, there was a saying that “no two snowflakes are alike.”

        Decades ago: We personified it to promote diversity. “We are all individuals, just like snowflakes!” The point of this was to get people to look past stereotypes. People weren’t defined by their ethnicity, they were individuals and you should judge them for the person they are, not by their appearance.

        Within the past few years: Conservatives use the term sarcastically. Delicate snowflakes, try so hard to be unique but melt if you look at them wrong! Meaning, instead of fitting in, they want to be different, but when we bully them for being different, they get upset.

        So, yes, it’s about uniqueness, but when used as an insult, it’s more focused on fragility.

        source
  • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Huh.

    I guess the “offended, and unable to deal with opposing opinions” part still fits. That’s just how I always understood it. But I’ve never actually looked it up. It seems I’m not the only one, though.

    source

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      It’s fascinating to read all the top comments from people who didn’t know the implication. I would guess that you and others assumed from context that it means “fragile.” It’s a reasonable assumption, and if enough people use it to mean that, then that will be a new meaning of the word.

      Language evolves, so it isn’t fair to say that they are “wrong,” but it belies the problem with using metaphors in communication. If the listener doesn’t understand the metaphor, they’re more likely to fill in their own guess than they are to ask for clarification or look it up. And that’s not a flaw, that’s actually a fantastic adaptation that makes language possible in the first place. How many words did you learn from the dictionary, compared to how many you learned from reading or hearing them used?

      Take the name “Nimrod.” Nimrod was a Biblical character known to be a great hunter. It has frequently been used sarcastically to impugn the hunting skills of the target, most famously by Daffy Duck to describe Elmer Fudd, and then again by Bugs Bunny to describe Yosemite Sam. But most of the people watching the cartoons weren’t Biblical scholars, and the word entered the public consciousness as a generic insult which has come to mean a stupid person.

      The term for the phenomenon is “semantic drift.” See also: peruse, awful, nice, and the currently-relevant “weird.”

      source

      • tobogganablaze@lemmus.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        I did feel kind of stupid when OP posted the definition. But then I saw a couple of other people that shared my interpretation, so that was nice.

        Didn’t expect to get such a quality reply! Very interesting. Thanks!

        source