>>105598849
>This is most certainly intentional.
>Intentional because Ladybird is "not political".
>Which of course means it is highly political – for straight white cis men from Silicon Valley who hang out on X.
This person"touched grass" so hard mold spores took root in their brain. The level of cognitive dissonance on display is astounding. They want to be offended that the project is "not political" while also subjecting their own political beliefs onto the project over the naming of a branch.
I had a brief look to see, someone talking about how language is political is a great opportunity to see if they practice what they preach. So I did, I scoured their social media feed which is truly cluttered. I saw numerous uses of words like "literally" when no, it was not literal, it was figurative. Perhaps the most offensive from the last week had to be this entry.
Here we have someone talking about why language is political while also eroding the very fabric of the language itself.
First I want to address that what they address as Great Britain is the United Kingdom, that the service that was nationalised was an English service. Furthermore this is not a sweeping nationalisation as devolved government already can nationalise services, this is a rail replacement bus service.
Onto the actual post we can see numerous instances of Americanisation when addressing a British subject.
>nationalizing
>privatized
That is not an acceptable term to use when discussing a British subject.
Another pain point is that colon. It's not used in an acceptable manner, here is where you could use a semicolon – or even an en dash if you're particularly wild. Immediately capitalising the phrase that follows the colon is also unacceptable, this is only done in British English if there is a noun or adjective following it, or it is a complete sentence. Here it is where a colon has been used incorrectly.
This person is virtue signalling.
