That’s so 2014
Did Caroline Nokes mean “basic bitch” when she said ““Well I think that that’s a really basic and to be quite frank insulting way to regard trans women, to keep harping back to calling them biological men”? I don’t know, but it’s certainly possible, so I decided to learn more about the epithet.
“Basic“[1] is a slang term in American popular culture used pejoratively to describe people who are perceived to prefer mainstream products, trends, and music. “Basic bitch” originated in hip hop culture and rose in popularity through rap music, songs, blogs, and videos from 2011 to 2014.[2][3] Their male counterparts are usually termed “bros“.[4][5][6]
The Urban Dictionary has more colorful detail.
Someone who is unflinchingly upholding of the status quo and stereotypes of their gender without even realizing it. She engages in typical, unoriginal behaviors, modes of dress, speech, and likes. She is tragically/laughably unaware of her utter lack of specialness and intrigue. She believers herself to be unique, fly, amazing, and a complete catch, when really she is boring, painfully normal, and par. She believes her experiences to be crazy, wild, and different or somehow more special than everything that everybody else is doing, when really, almost everyone is doing or has done the exact same thing. She is typical and a dime a dozen.
Interesting. I’m familiar with that kind of “oh I’m so zany/interesting/nonconformist/original” type, always commenting on her/himself as if we were planning to write a review. I didn’t know that’s what “basic” means.
I’m still not sure that’s what Caroline Nokes meant by it. The way she used it is compatible with meaning “that’s such a basic [crude, limited, literal] definition when we now know there are nuances.” I could be wrong though.
I’m pretty sure she meant it in the mundane sense.
It does seem to make more sense.
If thoughtful, attentive people are unsure what Nokes means by “basic”, then Nokes has failed at job 1 for a communicator, which it to make herself understood.
Beyond that, “basic” is doing double duty here. Nokes means something by it, but more importantly, she wields it to disparage and dismiss Swarbrick’s question without actually answering the question, and–crucially–without giving any reason or justification for not answering it.
As suggested above, Nokes likely uses “basic” to mean crude or limited or literal, but that alone doesn’t invalidate the question. For example, lawyers and judges commonly use the phrase “plain language” to justify a legal position. “The statute says ‘x’, so on the plain language of the law, plaintiff is entitled to ‘x'”. Which is to say, the argument is valid precisely because it is limited and literal; if you think otherwise, you are going to have to make your case.
Very helpful comparison, thank you.
It’s also worth noting that ‘basic’ as an insult has, like so many slang epithets, rapidly grown beyond the original meaning, to the point of being utterly generic, a way of saying, ‘bad’ without really any specific connotation. The central character of The Good Place, Elanor, routinely uses “Ya [you’re] basic,” as a simple put-down for almost everyone she disapproves of, for whatever reason. I’m sure folks who aren’t plugged into hip-hop culture have picked up on such cultural insertions and begun using it the same way.
Because it’s so dope to say basic instead of banal.
I wish more people understood this. Occam’s Razor tells us (paraphrased) to look for the simplest explanation. We must not multiply entities unnecessarily. So here’s iknklast’s razor: We must not multiply genders beyond what fits reality just to affirm delusions.
The principle of parsimony certainly applies here. Which is more likely, that there are two genders (sexes) that have been recognized throughout human history, or that there are 73 genders (sexes) in which many of them have the exact same presentation as one of the two, and have only recently been recognized?
While I am not one who believes the simplest explanation is always right, I do know that the probability decreases exponentially for everything you add to an explanation. By the time you get to 73 genders (sexes), the probability is so low as to be effectively zero.
In humans, it takes exactly two sexes to procreate. Most random mutations don’t survive the evolutionary process long term. If it required beyond two sexes to continue the species, they would be here.
It’s like saying extraterrestrials live among us, but they are hiding from us, or an invisible God exists.
Silliness.
iknklast — that’s brilliant! Definitely one for my scrapbook.
Thank you, Peter N. I’m blushing.
I like your razor, too, Iknklast. It’s obvious to me that the multiplicity of genders owes its genesis to a Tumblr population of kids who spent their youth making up Pokemon characters of their own. But there’s only so much you can do with sexuality and expression, and a lack of creativity limited their ability to differentiate much between genders.
Even with long sessions of Gender Flashcard drilling, anyone would find it difficult to name a gender based on the descriptions. Transmasc and Transfemme modifiers certainly don’t help.