fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #1876 ]

⌈ Secret Post #1876 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08. [repeat]

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

__________________________________________________

16.

__________________________________________________

17.

__________________________________________________

18.

__________________________________________________

19.

__________________________________________________

20.

__________________________________________________

21.

__________________________________________________

22.

__________________________________________________

23.

__________________________________________________

24.

__________________________________________________

25.

__________________________________________________

26.

__________________________________________________

27.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 095 secrets from Secret Submission Post #268.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 2 3 4 - too big ], [ 0 - repeats ]
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I wouldn't consider killing innocent children to be "good work". Yeah, that other stuff is great, but it doesn't change the fact that they.....wait for it....kill children.

I was waiting for this. I have my popcorn ready.

Fetuses, actually. But you go ahead, keep ignoring what words actually mean.

foetuses and babies/children are technically interchangeable as terms here, based on dictionary definitions. if you're going to be picky about english at least make sure what you're ragging on isn't correct first

Well yes, because dictionaries sometimes shoot for the more general definition rather than the super-specific scientific one.

ok cool but all three terms are still correct

Except context and connotation are a thing. Contextually (in this case, in discussions of reproductive rights), "babies/children" more accurately refers to post-birth humans.

accuracy is not equatable with correctness here

Since this discussion started with dictionary definitions, let's take it back there.

accuracy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/accuracy), n.: the condition or quality of being true, correct, or exact; freedom from error or defect; precision or exactness; correctness.

ok cool so you know how to use the internet

from merriam-webster: (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/accuracy)

1: freedom from mistake or error : correctness
2
a : conformity to truth or to a standard or model : exactness
b : degree of conformity of a measure to a standard or a true value — compare precision 2a

so here's a basic lesson - most words have several different meanings. from your very own source:

child
noun, plural chil·dren.
1. a person between birth and full growth; a boy or girl: books for children.
2. a son or daughter: All my children are married.
3. a baby or infant.
4. a human fetus.

this argument is petty and nonsensical; it only stems from qualms with appeals to emotion, but yall have to realise that a number of terms can fall under this category - anything from baby to cluster of cells. but regardless of how emotionally charged these words might be, they're still correct, even if you don't like them. i brought this up initially because the above anon brought it upon themselves to chide somebody else for their terminology, implying it was incorrect, when in fact it isn't.

Yes, many words have different meanings and shades of nuance, which is why it's important to consider context and connotation when using them. In the context of a discussion about reproductive rights, it is more correct to refer to a pre-birth human as a fetus, embryo, or zygote, depending on its stage of development, and reserve the term "child" for post-birth humans. In a different context, like at a baby shower, it is perfectly logical and accurate to refer to a pre-birth human as a "baby" or a "child." Because words mean different things in different contexts -- and in the context we're talking about, your Definition 1 quoted above ("a person between birth and full growth") is the correct one.

i am not arguing the degree to which it is correct; i am fully aware that calling a foetus a baby or a child is more or less an emotional appeal rather than a neutral one (regardless of context, actually). i don't know how much clearer i can be when i state that i was merely arguing against the notion that child/baby are incorrect completely, because they're not - even in this context. the physical condition of the foetus doesn't rely on the setting to change. whether you are standing in the presence of a baby shower or in the presence of an abortion clinic, the foetus is still the same thing. you can call it as you wish and you'd still be right in doing so, even if it seems emotionally misplaced.

(no subject)

tigerdreams.livejournal.com - 2012-02-22 03:35 (UTC) - Expand

ascend.livejournal.com - 2012-02-22 03:41 (UTC) - Expand

tigerdreams.livejournal.com - 2012-02-22 03:51 (UTC) - Expand

ascend.livejournal.com - 2012-02-22 03:52 (UTC) - Expand

tigerdreams.livejournal.com - 2012-02-22 05:45 (UTC) - Expand

ascend.livejournal.com - 2012-02-22 05:49 (UTC) - Expand

Merriam-Webster. Oh.

Let me give you a definition of 'fetus' from a marginally more authoritative source, namely a biology textbook:

"Medical and legal term for the stages of a developing human embryo from about the eight week of pregnancy (the point at which all major organ systems have formed) to the moment of birth."

*eighth

ascend.livejournal.com - 2012-02-22 04:56 (UTC) - Expand

brb gotta drop my fetus off at her gymnastics lesson

I laughed. I think I am a bad person.

that is clearly not what i meant but i'll give you bonus points for being as absurd as possible

correction for those who for some reason need it: unborn human offspring can be called foetuses/children/babies/clumps of cells and all of these terms fall under correct usage of the english language

Literally no one cares. Everyone got what the other anon was trying to say.

if people didn't care they probably wouldn't be responding

(deleted comment)

that's as easy as finding one who calls them ~tumours~ or clusters of tissue. a biologist is going to use scientific terminology. that doesn't mean a biologist's choice of words is going to be the only correct choice.

nayrt

Ummm....a fetus is a child.

A cluster of cells that cannot even breathe on its own, let alone think or feel, is not a child.

what a coincidence that you chose such terminology in light of this reply (http://fandomsecrets.livejournal.com/843848.html?thread=525107272#t525107272) i left to your deleted comment

Indeed...