Infantile language 2020

[Blue Jam]

Not a big fan of Disney but I do like a lot of Pixar's films. Is that acceptable?

Don't care for Dream works though. Shrek especially can fucked.

[Blue Jam]

Nrrrgggh double post fat-handed twat

[Sebastian Cobb]

Not phrasing, but people that dress their pets up need to have a word with themselves. Their pets never look particularly chuffed about it.

[The Mollusk]

Also why do millennials and zoomers call going out for a drink in the afternoon 'Day drinking'.

Oh what did you do yesterday - Oh we went Day drinking.

Just say we went for a drink. Nobody cares what fucking time it was.

Getting smashed in the daytime is a whole different ball game to getting smashed at night though. Rolling through to about 8pm when you've been on the stuff since just after lunchtime is a fuckin surly mad state of mind, especially in the summer. Get home with another six cans, order a pizza, roll a joint, have two tokes on it and pass out to the endless loop of a DVD menu before the food arrives. God, it's bliss.

"Prinking" (which means "pre-drinking", which is having a few jars while you get ready to leave the house to do more drinking) has always bothered me. Not because it's infantile though, just because I know that "proozing" ("pre-boozing") is way better and everyone is a twat for not using that.

[Chedney Honks]

I quite like some of Pixar so I give them a pass

[idunnosomename]

Not a big fan of Disney but I do like a lot of Pixar's films. Is that acceptable?

Don't care for Dream works though. Shrek especially can fucked.

people don't obsess over Pixar in the same way as the Disney canon though. they just say oh Inside Out was a very good film.

Pixar films are Disney films now but then so will be just about all mainstream films in the next decade

[touchingcloth]

Not phrasing, but people that dress their pets up need to have a word with themselves. Their pets never look particularly chuffed about it.

See also "fur baby" and "pet parent" and "dog mum".

Some of the young cunts at work when volunteering for some of the crappier tasks which nonetheless need to get done say "I volunteer as a tribute", which I assume is Game of Thrones.

One of the young cunts who hosts a lot of our company Zoom calls tries to keep the energy levels up by wooping and getting us all to applaud, but instead of like a normal person with claps encourages us all to "do finger snaps" and snaps his fingers in front of his webcam while going "wooo, snaps, woooo". I like the guy a lot on a professional level and quite well on a personal one, but FUCK ME DIE.

[bgmnts]

Stanning.

[Twit 2]

Tribute is Hunger Games, I think. Also, a nice pint of Cornish ale.

[idunnosomename]

Stanning.

i wouldn't mind if everyone who said it understood the ironic context of a fan so obsessed with attention he kills himself and his pregnant partner when he doesn't get it

[flotemysost]

"Doing it for the 'gram." I assumed people must have been talking about coke the first few times I heard that one.

But then, the first time I heard "selfie" out of context, when that one first started doing the rounds (whenever that was - a few years ago now) I thought it meant having a wank, so my radar for these things isn't very astute.

[idunnosomename]

selfie just blew up when front-facing cameras became common c.2010. OED:

A photograph that one has taken of oneself, esp. one taken with a smartphone or webcam and shared via social media.
2002   www2b.abc.net.au 13 Sept. (forum post, accessed 9 Dec. 2013)    Sorry about the focus, it was a selfie.
2008   Gold Post Bull. (Austral.) 7 Aug. (Play Mag.) 70/2   Admittedly, there are some great photos, but way too many 'selfies'—at least 400 self portraits.
2011   Chicago Tribune (Electronic ed.) 3 Nov. 15   Most of us have taken a selfie at one point. But it's the constant picture-posters who start to annoy you.
2016   Daily Tel. 25 Aug. 16/4   Singer Justin Timberlake tweeted photo-booth-style selfies of himself and his wife..during a fundraising lunch.

calling any image of a person a "selfie" was the most fuckin annoying thing early 2010s but that's thankfully fucked off now. like amazeballs.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

"Munching on [snack food]"

mUnChInG oN

M U N C H I N G  O O O N

oh terribly sorry I seem to have smashed your whole entire face in

[idunnosomename]

That's a yikes from me!

[Noodle Lizard]

A co-worker recently described someone else as having "Slytherin energy".

These are people in their 30s and 40s and in fairly important positions. It's difficult for me to reconcile with, having grown up with a distinct notion of what "grownups" were, but I guess that's generations for you.

[flotemysost]

All of these examples of adult Potter worship are painful. And I'm saying this as someone who was very into the first few books when I was 10/11/12 (i.e. the same age Harry Potter is in the first few books).

My flatmate (an adult) went to see The Cursed Child (Harry Potter stage play) at the start of the year, the waiting list for tickets was months, and she was there all day and evening. Goes on for fucking hours apparently. Except it's not the Ring Cycle or even Angels in America, it's just a story based on some books that came out over twenty years ago written by a gazillionaire transphobe.

That sounds really snobby I know, obviously people can like what they like and god knows I get excited over some ridiculous and terrible stuff. I just hate that it's become one of those things where if you're not all gushing about it or you don't know the names of all the Hogwarts houses, or you remain stony-faced when some cunt goes "leviOHsa!" (or whatever it is) then that means you must be a cold, joyless freak in their eyes.

[touchingcloth]

Same goes with any performative fan wank, really. Quoting Monty Python, Shrek-themed weddings, going on about Kessel runs. I always wonder if these people who wear their fandom so overtly on their sleeves actually get any enjoyment out of the thing or are just jaded and knackered from having to always talk about things going up to eleven. I like Python, Star Wars and Potter, but ultimately I find them just fine, they don't make my heart soar or my sides ache, and you're probably not going to find an I Put A Shrek In It t-shirt in my wardrobe.

Well, I said it. So, that happened.

[Blue Jam]

I remember when people would mock Treckies- sorry, Trekkers- for going to conventions, learning to speak Klingon etc. Now that stuff has just been normalised. I wonder if that's a good thing (pop culture geeks not getting mocked so much anymore) or a bad thing (most of that stuff can get in grave).

Anyone guilty of any performative fanwank themselves? I own a fair few pop culture t-shirts and have wondered if I'm a bit too old to be wearing "Aperture Laboratories" or "Yes I can hear you Clem Fandango" on my chest but it's fun so fuck it.

[Retinend]

Well I'm a huge Beatlemaniac - have all the books, some shirts, my keyring says "Strawberry Fields Forever", I'm admin of a Beatles social club, I make Beatles mixtapes for friends, I regularly weave lyrics and quotations into conversation etc.. It's who I am and you can take it or leave it. I suppose I ought to stick up for the Harry Potter and Klingon people, therefore: neither franchise is personally to my taste, but I know from my beatlemania that having something you know is dorky but you really love is good for you - it trains you not to take yourself too seriously and to screen out people who would be judgemental about things like that; judgemental about your enjoying something.

What's more, it's socially useful to have some massive cultural monolith as object of your fandom, because everyone has heard of it and so bringing it up there's a good chance someone in your vicinity will share your passion, at least in part, or at least know enough about it to be amused and curious.

Naturally I don't think it's good to be about nothing other than your fandom (and I try not to be), but in the name of compensating for an inclination towards the esoteric (which I definitely do have, and most of this forum share), I hereby defend performative fanwankery.

[Blue Jam]

My flatmate (an adult) went to see The Cursed Child (Harry Potter stage play) at the start of the year, the waiting list for tickets was months, and she was there all day and evening. Goes on for fucking hours apparently. Except it's not the Ring Cycle or even Angels in America, it's just a story based on some books that came out over twenty years ago written by a gazillionaire transphobe.

I always wonder if these people who wear their fandom so overtly on their sleeves actually get any enjoyment out of the thing or are just jaded and knackered from having to always talk about things going up to eleven.

Well I'm a huge Beatlemaniac

With The Beatles, Star Trek and Doctor Who (for example) I can understand people being completists and collectors- those things have a huge amount of output and a fan would be likely to enjoy it all on some level.

Harry Potter is- what? Seven books and seven films? The rest just seems like so much barrel-scraping. You could get through the books and films in a month and really enjoy them and be hungry for more, but then what? Would you genuinely enjoy collecting all the spin-offs and merchandise and tie-ins and being on a waiting list for months to sit through a four-hour stage play, or would it all get a bit joyless and lose the (ahem) magic?

I think Star Wars is an interesting exception: Three original films, a huge and obsessive fandom, but a considerable proportion of the die-hard fans who really don't care for any of the prequels, sequels or spin-offs.

[Retinend]

There are more HP books than LOTR books, though.

To your point: I think consumerism is a trap for a lot of superfans - they feel like they have to prove they are the biggest fan by having the most thing-related stuff. Moreover, a lot of fans also see characters as the perfect friends that they don't have in real life, and they want to have little idols of them around. I find both things a little infantile, not going to lie.

[Harry Badger]

A co-worker recently described someone else as having "Slytherin energy".

[Retinend]

^^^ this is also dead snidey, in addition to being infantile. Did the colleague at least deserve it, Noodle Lizard?

[Blue Jam]

There are more HP books than LOTR books, though.

I guess things might be different if Tolkien were still alive today. Would he be writing spin-offs and licensing tons of plastic crap to be put in massive window displays at Blackwells?

[Sebastian Cobb]

A co-worker recently described someone else as having "Slytherin energy".

"I'm sorry I don't read children's books" is the correct rebuttal to that.

[Butchers Blind]

The "I'm not crying, you're crying".  As an adult male I don't cry and haven't since I fell off my bike when I was seven.  Don't push your immature emotions onto me.

[idunnosomename]

Well that "im not crying you're crying" is dumb because the speaker childishly self-deprecates by implicitly stigmatising crying, but acknowledges they are doing it anyway

Crying is fine. Where would we be... without tears

[dr beat]

You'll all be doing it tomorrow

[touchingcloth]

With The Beatles, Star Trek and Doctor Who (for example) I can understand people being completists and collectors- those things have a huge amount of output and a fan would be likely to enjoy it all on some level.

Harry Potter is- what? Seven books and seven films? The rest just seems like so much barrel-scraping. You could get through the books and films in a month and really enjoy them and be hungry for more, but then what? Would you genuinely enjoy collecting all the spin-offs and merchandise and tie-ins and being on a waiting list for months to sit through a four-hour stage play, or would it all get a bit joyless and lose the (ahem) magic?

I think Star Wars is an interesting exception: Three original films, a huge and obsessive fandom, but a considerable proportion of the die-hard fans who really don't care for any of the prequels, sequels or spin-offs.

Star Wars is also the biggest name in the "X ruined my childhood/life/ability to masturbate satisfactorily to completion" camp. It's interesting to me that people can love a thing so completely that they see it as having the ability to ruin their whole childhood on the one hand, but not enough that something which isn't the thing itself is able to destroy the thing.

Performative fanwank par excellence.

[touchingcloth]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/10-reasons-why-obsessively-crowbarring-your-fandom-into-unrelated-areas-is-more-jacob-than-edward