littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
I'm still no nearer understanding what twink means.
Don't fashjacket me, you fucking twink.
Am I doing it right?
Don't fashjacket me, you fucking twink.
Am I doing it right?
My sense is that twink is broadly complementary to the person themselves - calling them fit - but not so much to their partner/pursuer - too old for them.I'm still no nearer understanding what twink means.
Don't fashjacket me, you fucking twink.
Am I doing it right?
Ah I see.My sense is that twink is broadly complementary to the person themselves - calling them fit - but not so much to their partner/pursuer - too old for them.
I will lose my shit if nobody twinkjackets me.Is "twinkjacketing" a term? It is now, I suppose.
No.I'm still no nearer understanding what twink means.
Don't fashjacket me, you fucking twink.
Am I doing it right?
Colin's left you for a twink? Sorry to hear it.No.
"Are you going to leave me for a twink? I didn't think you were that shallow!"
That's the example given in Collins, my dictionary of choice.
Indeed. I liked it when we used proper terms like "ecaf", "lallies", "national handbag", "naff" and "lilly law"This is making me feel even older
It's all contextual, innit? Like, it suggests boyishness rather than muscularity or whatever the word is. So if you were going into negotiations with Putin, and you tried to butter him up by calling him a twink, I feel like it could have the opposite effect.My sense is that twink is broadly complementary to the person themselves - calling them fit - but not so much to their partner/pursuer - too old for them.
I shall.Just checked, and you can still get the "evil twink energy" shirts from Bad Gays.
Oh, OK. I thought it just meant young and hot but maybe a bit dim.It's all contextual, innit? Like, it suggests boyishness rather than muscularity or whatever the word is.
It's a young, slim, boyish looking chap. You ain't that, comrade. You probably want a t-shirt with a bear on it.Oh, OK. I thought it just meant young and hot but maybe a bit dim.
The title is correct. I’ll have a read later, cheers.Cristifcuffs piece - I've not had a chance to read it yet but may be of some use.
They are certainly right to criticise the conflation of states with workers in those states. Plenty of posts on U75, and elsewhere, making that mistake.
I don’t think I’d say “fash” in either sense.
I think we’ve tacitly reached the point of agreeing that what “we” do is largely not going to make much difference in Ukraine.
See above.(BTW, what the fuck has happened to this thread in the past few hours?)
That’s pretty good progress for only a weeks discussionI think we’ve tacitly reached the point of agreeing that what “we” do is largely not going to make much difference in Ukraine.
We’re all growing up.That’s pretty good progress for only a weeks discussion
I think I've reached the point where I'm starting to grow down again.We’re all growing up.
I know what you mean. If people have grown up somewhere then it's their home. But Russian speakers were settled all around the borders of the old Soviet Union, on the Finnish border, in the Baltic states, in Kaliningrad, in Moldova and Transnistria, in the Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Sakhalin. Very few ever learnt the languages of their new fellow citizens. So labelling them as 'other' from their compatriots will achieve nothing. Hopefully they will be able to adopt and identify with their new nationalities rather than cling on to an imperialist Russian identity.Well it is post colonial obviously but I don’t think there's much to be gained from like eg labelling Russians in Moldova etc 'settlers'
It can be a delicate balance in what is often a very difficult and fraught situation. But this is where ethno-nationalism shows itself up as a dead end. For instance, the language requirements for citizenship of the Baltic states, which have left hundreds of thousands of people stateless, are not the way to do it. Ultimately these are simply economic migrants and the descendants of economic migrants. They are not the enemy.I know what you mean. If people have grown up somewhere then it's their home. But Russian speakers were settled all around the borders of the old Soviet Union, on the Finnish border, in the Baltic states, in Kaliningrad, in Moldova and Transnistria, in the Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Sakhalin. Very few ever learnt the languages of their new fellow citizens. So labelling them as 'other' from their compatriots will achieve nothing. Hopefully they will be able to adopt and identify with their new nationalities rather than cling on to an imperialist Russian identity.
But it is what will give the Putin regime the chance to throw around accusations of 'fascism.'It can be a delicate balance in what is often a very difficult and fraught situation. But this is where ethno-nationalism shows itself up as a dead end. For instance, the language requirements for citizenship of the Baltic states, which have left hundreds of thousands of people stateless, are not the way to do it. Ultimately these are simply economic migrants and the descendants of economic migrants. They are not the enemy.
Not just that though. For various reasons minorities such as Jews, Roma etc in those places often learn and speak Russian rather than the 'original' language of the area. Eg Moldovan Jewish community is mostly Russian speakingI know what you mean. If people have grown up somewhere then it's their home. But Russian speakers were settled all around the borders of the old Soviet Union, on the Finnish border, in the Baltic states, in Kaliningrad, in Moldova and Transnistria, in the Caucasus, Kazakhstan, Sakhalin. Very few ever learnt the languages of their new fellow citizens. So labelling them as 'other' from their compatriots will achieve nothing. Hopefully they will be able to adopt and identify with their new nationalities rather than cling on to an imperialist Russian identity.