So can I assign the responsibility of coming up with "skibidi toilet" to women in general, then?

With all due respect, I regret to inform you that your linguistic trendiness has been mogged (blud is seething rn) and your sanity fanum taxed by W rizzlers ong fr fr so scuff no cap

(Disclaimer: this is a joke)

What did you say can you translate please.

It basically says both trendiness and sanity has been robbed away by "W rizzlers" a.k.a. "someone with lots of charm and charisma" (by Gen Z and Alpha standards), and the addressee ("blud") is frustrated ("seething") by the fact. Also, I often see such usage of the parentheses above in memes like this.

Didn't you read the article? No cap is out. Even I, a middle aged ex-hipster knew that. ;) (I know, emojis are so over)

I was in Paris and somebody was complaining that that the kids were saying "en vrai" all the time. I explained to her that it's "for real" which is one of my favorite 200x era hip hop phrases.

Most slang goes way back. "Cool" is 1930s black jazz culture, and now every white grandma say it without it even sounding odd.

> Didn't you read the article? No cap is out.

Right, it's 4 years old:

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stop%20the%2...

I don't care, I'm based

Rizz up, bro. Your post gives big yikes vibes.

Flew too close to the sun, giving me that ickarus.

When I worked in Japan, I heard much comment about linguistic innovation among teenage girls. I had the impression that it was more extreme in Japan than other countries, but maybe not.

With linguistic change driven mostly by females, I wonder what this indicates about societies that are or were linguistically conservative, also whether there was a difference between literate and pre-literate societies.

More tangibly, kawaii culture is one of the most influential cultural revolutions to ever emerge primarily from teenage girls; so Japan is indeed a great example here.

Makes sense. It has been well documented by linguists for decades that women both communicate more than men and also on average use a bigger vocabulary to communicate more precisely. Teenage girls in particular spend more time together than older women, as they don't yet have things like work and parenting to distract them.

It makes sense that the majority of linguistic innovations comes from the most capable practitioners.

> for sure —MUZ

(In my headcanon "super" had come into common use ca.2000, but now I see it was already extant at least two decades earlier: "It's like so bitching 'cause like everybody's like super-super nice")

> use a bigger vocabulary to communicate more precisely

I contest this point. Dumping /dev/random to stdout does not imply more meaningful communication. I know many people who are fond of saying a lot of words whilst saying nothing at all.

So I am guessing if we teach teenage girls (and future mothers) nonviolent communication, we will have peace in our communities in a couple of generations?

If by 'peace' you mean the coercive control, manipulation and emotional exploitation of those around you, perhaps.

This is a dark view on non violent communication. I don't think it is as useful as it's proponents says, but surely you give it way more power and intent that those techniques really have, no ?

You can argue whether it is manipulative, but you can not deny "the intent" here. You you read up technique and then apply it, the conscious intent is 100% there. You made an active choice and went out of your way to enact it.

I can deny the intent to be exploitative and coercive.

Really I don't see how. I would like an example, i have learned sales techniques and to me even sales techniques, who are multiple order of magnitude more manipulative imho, aren't really coercive . Also, sales techniques works way better on persons not aware of them, non-violent communication mostly work if both persons use it (that makes it way less actionable than it's proponents affirm), which is to me the opposite of exploitative.

Maybe you have jist shifted what you allow yourself to see as coercive and manipulative in the process of accepting sales techniques.

sure, just watch Clueless

or listen to Valley Girl by Franc Zappa

Frank.

And the valley girl voice was his daughter, Moon Unit.

Here they were on Letterman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijg2_vVyu0Q

Related (and mentioned) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_paradox_(sociolinguisti...

>>> Gretchen: "That is so fetch!"

>>> Regina: "Gretchen, stop trying to make fetch happen! It's not going to happen!"

So now we know there is some linguistic context to that conversation.

Slay

> If you're on … a train or a bus, what you should do is position yourself as close as possible to a group of young women

No, I don’t think I will

It gets funnier:

> (…) position yourself as close as possible to a group of young women and then shut your eyes and listen.

Like a cartoon character faking being asleep. Yes, I’m sure those teenagers won’t find that creepy or weird at all and will continue speaking as if you weren’t there.

Though in fairness, they’re quoting a woman. Maybe the interviewer was also a woman and they were really speaking one-to-one, not thinking that specific section would be quoted.

I was almost surprised that anyone printed that 'advice' but then I remembered it's ABC News Online, Australia's most trusted news service. It's probably a misquote and/or the person who they thought they were quoting actually died three years ago and had a completely different name.

In any case, barf me out. No way. Gag me with a spoon.

Barf me out too, indeed.

How to look like a creep 101.

Teenage girls? Fer sure, totally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qb21lsCQ3EM

What happens if you include image memes? ie, the dominant mode of chatter in male circles.

I’m not sure how you’d quantify generic “meme rate of change” though, across such disparate mediums.

Yeah sure, bussin' fr no cap.

> Phrases that are "out": no cap

Time to update, ser

> "Women seem to have an innate linguistic ability that's superior to men's," she says.

Imagine saying that, but in reverse.

"Men seem to have an innate tallness ability that is superior to womens'?"

What is wrong with that? You seem to be trying to make some sort of American culture war argument out of something completely uncontroversial.

You might also be interested in Dr Geoff Lindsey's video on 'vocal fry'[0] which is a linguistic phenomenon also associated with young women (although it isn't that simple). Dr Lindsey's channel is totally bitchin' like you wouldn't believe. You'll love it! I'm sure.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0yL2GezneU

> Dr Lindsey's channel is totally bitchin' like you wouldn't believe.

On god fr fr no cap.

When you mentioned vocal fry and I saw a YT link I thought I was going to see this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHHt-tYS2es

It's a shame it didn't get renewed.

>Often slang has originated from marginalised groups such as the queer community or POC (People of Colour).

And that hasn't changed, that is still exactly the case. When it's not 4chan lingo (which mostly stays in text/image form), it's AAVE. Not sure why it's always "Gen Z" or teenage girls getting credit for this.

Just look at their list of phrases that are "in":

Phrases that are "in"

>Bet — 'I'm down'. For example, if someone asks you to go out for dinner, you say 'bet' >You devoured/ate — said in response to someone succeeding with style >Full send — not caring, just going for it >Slaps — If something slaps, it's really good (normally in a food context) >Ceebs — a variation of CBF [can't be f*ked] >Ick — a sudden feeling of grossness, often about a person's behaviour or mannerisms

out of these, only "Ceebs" (sounds like the a twist on "can't be arsed") and "Ick" aren't AAVE.

And the list of phrases that are "out":

>No cap — the truth >Lit — something is great, but now considered very "2017-2018" >Fam — used in reference to friends >Slay — used when someone performs well, but considered dated and you'd only use the term ironically

These are all AAVE.