Pet Peeves

[D'Snowth]

I was never taught that either and I went to a religious school.

Oddly enough, I was homeschooled for high school, and homeschool is mostly religious-based cirriculum... and that IS where I learned it. Hmmm...

 

[CensoredAlso]

Oddly enough, I was homeschooled for high school, and homeschool is mostly religious-based cirriculum... and that IS where I learned it. Hmmm...

I mean I can see some groups choosing to make separate rules for religious figures. But I personally was never taught that in school, not even in Religion class. So ::shrugs:: there you go, lol.

 

[C to the J]

What irks me is seeing online posts with objectionable content and really really bad words in them in various social networks. I'm, of course, referring to words much worse than those that don't bother me so much, such as h--l and d--n. I mean, do some people using the Internet not know to think before they act?

And my minor pet peeve is the fact that we don't see "Disney's" on top of movie and TV show titles. I think the possessive form makes a title look way cooler. Of course, there are names that still carry that form, (e.g. Disney's Hollywood Studios, Disney's Art of Animation hotel). And the 2nd theme park in Disneyland Resort was called "Disney's California Adventure," which had a REALLY nice ring to it before they took out the apostrophe S. Is there a story behind the decision to start making names and titles look less effective?

I have no problem with the "Disney and Pixar" name, though. And I'm fine with instances where it is okay to have "Disney": "Disney Adventures" (a defunct magazine), "Disney Movie Rewards," and "Disney Infinity."

And one last thing, when a movie is playing, the name "Walt Disney Pictures" in front of the Disney castle looks WAY cooler and makes a nice triangular form with the castle.

 

[Drtooth]

I hate the word "Whom" and the snobby uptight grammarphiles that insist that it's a correct word and thumb their noses at anyone who uses "who" in its place. Whom never sounds correct, I don't care whom says we need to use whom. It sounds, instead, like the equivalent of faux-Elisabethian speak where you add the suffix "-ith" to the end of every word. It's clumsy, obnoxious, and archaic.

 

[animalrescuer]

My major pet peeves are bad drivers, especially when they cut you off without using a turn signal (It's called that for a reason!), when they speed past you for no reason or they're driving too slow in front of you and when you almost get in a major accident with another car, that's happened to my family too many times to count!
Also, when you go to a job interview only to find they hired someone with more experience than you and you can't get hired for the job you want because you don't have a lot of experience, but they don't hire you so you can get the experience you need, this aggravates me to no end!
The ignorance of people when it comes to animal abuse, bullying, crimes against other people and people who have disabilities, visible or not!
But my number one pet peeve is people who disrespect others or is rude to them in their face or behind their back even with their own family, we had issues with that with my brother and one of my cousin's sons.

 

[charlietheowl]

I'm sure I have more, but my number one pet peeve is getting wet and not being able to change into dry clothes right after. Even if there's only a slight chance of rain, I'm bringing an umbrella and/or rain jacket with me. Sitting in damp clothes is just awful.

 

[C to the J]

I hate the word "Whom" and the snobby uptight grammarphiles that insist that it's a correct word and thumb their noses at anyone who uses "who" in its place. Whom never sounds correct, I don't care whom says we need to use whom. It sounds, instead, like the equivalent of faux-Elisabethian speak where you add the suffix "-ith" to the end of every word. It's clumsy, obnoxious, and archaic.

Believe it or not, "whom" is actually used the same way "him," "her," and "they" are used.
For instance, "for whom the bell tolls" is equivalent to "the bell tolls for whom."
Replace "whom" with "them" and you get "the bell tolls for them." "Whom" is the pronoun most people overlook when using a particular subject pronoun, and I see no reason it shouldn't be used.

What bothers me grammar-wise is when somebody types "the reason... is because..." when it should be "the reason... is that..." or "(something something) because...).

 

[Slackbot]

As far as I am concerned, the word "whom" can get lost. Do you know anyone who uses it in actual conversation? Me neither. It sounds so pretentious. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a pet peeve, as I just don't care enough about it.

My grammar peeves are: "different than", the ubiquitous misuse of "literally" and "ironic," and the omission of the Oxford comma. I know that the last one has recently become acceptable, but I refuse to go along with it. When I wrote an article for the Baum Bugle last year I told the editor that I understood he might need to edit it for length or style, and I was okay with that, but if he messes with my Oxford commas I will cut him.

 

[Drtooth]

As far as I am concerned, the word "whom" can get lost. Do you know anyone who uses it in actual conversation? Me neither. It sounds so pretentious. I wouldn't go so far as to call it a pet peeve, as I just don't care enough about it.

It's one of those wonders of English grammar that makes little to no sense and is only a rule because some guy says it had to be. it's not just the use of whom, but have you ever noticed that whommmm ever uses "whommmmm" accentuates the MMMMM to really sound patronizing? To me, it's essentially foisting imaginary superiority. It comes off less Fraisier Crane and more "I are more smarterer than weeezell!"

As far as Literally goes, that's another great thing I like to call spicing up sentences with a loose understanding of exciting sounding words. We need new words that replace Literally... a word that says "I'm exaggerating, but the situation was that ridiculous/severe there's no other way to describe it without sounding urgent." Cuz the term figuratively would sound kinda stupid in context. As in "I'm so hungry! I've figuratively not eaten for days."

English has an unwritten rule about getting rid of archaic phrasing and inventing new words (as stupid as they sound). There's a lot that are cumbersome, but somehow correct or more correct that no one uses colloquially that no one would miss if they got rid of. And on the flip side, if we can make up the word "Toyetic" to refer to something that's either made to or has high potential to sell toys, we certainly can make up some new words to replace misused ones.

 

[beatnikchick300]

Gee, got an hour?

1. Bigots. Of any kind...
2. Moral Guardians who say just because something has sex, or violence, or swearing mean it must be banned! Because, apparently, taking personal responsibility and just not watching such things is out of the question...
3. People who use poor grammar (yeah, that annoyance works both ways. I'm one of those "snobby grammarphiles." Deal with it ).
4. (The next few will be geeks/fans/fandoms who give geeks/fans/fandoms a bad name): Rabid fans who jump down your throat if you dislike or criticize (no, those are NOT one and the same) the object of their fandom.
5. Rabid haters who foam at the mouth at any mention of the object of their hatedom (I see a lot of brony-haters who do this).
6. Draco in Leather Pants fans (not just fan-girls, because I've seen male fans do this, too, and female characters get this treatment). Just because you find a villain hot or intriguing doesn't make them a good/sympathetic character.
7. Ron the Death Eater haters. Conversely, just because you dislike a character doesn't make them evil (and I've noticed that quite a few people who partake in this also partake in #6, which does smack of hypocrisy).
8. Opinion myopia. People need to get over the mindset that everyone in the world is obligated to agree with them about movies, TV shows, books, and media in general.
9. The word "hipster" used as an insult. It's really getting old, and it's often just a word used to snark-shame people for having opinions that aren't popular (yeah, how dare they? What do they think, this is a free country or something?). And the thing is, the word never used to be an insult. Yeah, as you can see, people jumping down other people's throats for their opinions really bugs me.
10. Having wet pants. Happens a lot in the winter...
11. People who drive like idiots. No, that's not the right phrasing....it's more...people who drive like the world is all about them.