“generalizing”

Interesting that all of the top 10 dictionaries I checked have the classic, non-insane definitions of generalization (yellow)

— except one dictionary, the cambridge dictionary, which does have the insane definition as its top definition:

“to make a general statement that something is true in all cases, based on what is true in some cases” (orange)

Absolute wordcel scam.

So, with this insane word sense added, “generalize’ becomes a skunked term, an auto-antonym, which can mean both something perfectly reasonable and its insane 100% opposite

— which is exactly what makes it useful for wordcel scam

So that’s why Rose bans it, to stop this wordcel scam.

And the very first time Rose caught it, she was correct in flagging it as wordcel-weaponized scamming, pretending that any general statements are about “all” members of the group, even when explicitly stated otherwise.

Auto-antonyms i.e. contronyms, i.e. words that can mean two completely opposite things at once, which lends them to wordcel weaponization

— prime tool of wordcel scams.

Know their weapons.

🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🄾🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶

Ever notice that it’s almost 100% always a woman replying like Person B does here, and almost never a man?:

Person A: “Group X does more of bad thing Y, and so you can expect more of group X to be punished for it”

Person B: “But I am in group X and don’t do Y, so your statement that group does more of bad thing Y isn’t true”

E.g. you practically never see:

Person A: “Men are more murderous than women, so you can expect more men to be jailed for mudred”

Person B: “But I’m a man and I don’t murder, so more men shouldn’t be in jail for murder”

Never see that from men.

Why is it overwhelmingly women who have this style of argument?

Difference in competitive style.

= WOMEN ACTUALLY DO “GENERALIZE” IN THE SENSE OF THE BAD VERSION OF GENERALIZE, FAR MORE THAN MEN

I.e.

Women DO have a vastly stronger tendency to judge ALL members of a group by the group’s general traits.

Why?

= Women’s general tendency toward group-level stigmatization and ostracization competition style, versus mens’ tendency toward direct individual-level competition.

I.e. evaluating everything in terms of is this person in my “in-group” or are they in my “out-group”, instead of thinking about is it true.

Can see it everywhere.

Women frequenty saying, and actually acting upon, hard preferences like these, which you’ll virtually never hear from men:

“I would never date a writer”

“I would never date an engineer”

For quite innoculous group types.

= Literally judging ALL members of a group based on some group, based group tendencies.

Contrast with men:

“I prefer huge boobs” — and then bro immediately goes and happily dates a woman with zero boobs because he likes how she smiles at her. Men extremely willing to give people in the “bad group” a chance, and immediately make huge exceptions. Much more individual-level thinking. Much less in-group vs out-group thinking.

Women tend to ACTUALLY BELIEVE that whenever you talk about group-level tendencies, that it means ALL PEOPLE IN THAT GROUP.

= Projection.

Those women who do this are projecting their own thinking behavior onto everyone else, saying everyone else is unable to think in any other way, just like them.

= Those who accuse others of “generalizing”, in the sense of that if you say anything about a group that it applies to ALL members of the group, are telling on themselves.

And the reason they do that is because of a strong preference of women toward group-level thinking, instead of individual-level thinking, in contrast to how men think much more at the individual-level instead of group-level.

Women who harshly judge ALL in a group based on their group, instead of individually — Be better, stop projecting your bad habit, of making extreme judgements about individuals based on their their group, onto others.

= Why the “Not ALL X” meme exists. People accusing you of thinking like that, because that is how they truly think.

🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🄾🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶