It's actually quite funny- the people who call people in favour of equality "snowflakes" are the same people who spit their dummies out when they're asked to default to "chairperson" instead of "chairman"
It's a very simple and effortless thing to do, and it makes such a difference to use more inclusive language (it's amazing how the subconscious mind works), and yet they act like it's the most arduous task!
And they say the other group are the weak and easily offended ones!
Anybody that calls anybody else a snowflake, no matter how silly the thing was the other person said ( while a lot of times there is a genuinly good point in there, but yea there are also persons that make an issue of absolutely everything) is done in my book. It shows more about the character of the person that calls someone that, and often those personalities are rather ugly..
same with the you must be fun at parties, often the original comment is actually interesting and has a good point, but yea, sometimes quite boring or a bit too anal/nitpicking. But why the need to trash somebody just because you found their remark boring. That is soo childish, sadly often it is adults making these remarks...
Does "inclusive language" really make that much of a difference? I agree that it makes people feel more welcome and able to participate, but as a general rule small changes lead to small effects.
@Unobtainium, I don't know, but it seems like in recent years we've been trending away from having to specify "female" in front of everything ("female doctor", "female pilot", "female scientist" etc) for people to ever assume it's a woman working it, which is neat. That might partly be the result of inclusive language, it could also just be the fact that those fields have more women in them nowadays
I think changing words like "chairman" is a bit weird, but I don't see an issue with using "they" instead of "he or she" every time. Doesn't hurt anyone, it's less of a mouthful and being nonspecific can help avoid people making assumptions about a person before meeting them. It's kinda cool honestly
There's no problem with the answers, but it would be more consistent with other quizzes to display "Duke/Duchess" and "Emperor/Empress". Both are already accepted, both are correct, it's as simple as that.
Well a woman can become chairperson as well, don't you think? What's the problem with making language less sexist? And most of the time it is abbreviated as chair anyway.
read the first part of Le Deuxieme Sexe by de Beauvoir, in which she examines the questionable state of language in which the masculine is always used for both the male and the neutral, hence suggesting that the masculine/male/man is the default and the woman is always the 'Other'
same haha, I thought man what was it called again, but I couldnt think of it. Then I thought, yea think of schwarzenegger and terminator then it might come to you and instantly I knew.
I don't think Bishop is especially a Catholic title so the clue is slightly misleading. it's also used in the Anglican Church as well as some Orthodox churches.
There are Christian denominations without bishops, so the clue can't be "a Christian diocese". Neither can you list all denominations that do have bishops. If the leader of a Catholic diocese is a bishop, this doesn't mean that bishops are not leaders of other groups.
Actually, it shouldn't. The title, "Kalifah" was only used for the four people after the major leader in the religion of islam (the religion they practiced). They gave the title, "Khan" and used it throughout the muslim and asian countries. For example, Ghengis Khan was the ruler of the empire that destroyed the Ottomans, taking the title from the people before them.
"Ghengis Khan was the ruler of the empire that destroyed the Ottomans." Um, what? Genghis Khan died in 1227, and the Ottoman Empire (not really an empire at that point, but the Ottoman polity) was founded in 1299. Perhaps you're thinking of the Timurid invasion of Anatolia and the defeat of the Ottomans at Ankara in 1402? Timur claimed descent from Genghis Khan, but his empire was a new one, and his defeat of the Ottomans was a setback for them, but didn't stop them from capturing Constantinople just half a century later and going on to form one of the world's largest empires, so they certainly weren't destroyed by Timur. The Ottoman Empire didn't fall until 1922. Incidentally, the Ottoman rulers used many titles including Caliph (Khalifa), Sultan, Padishah, Hakan (Khagan, or Khan of Khans) and Caesar.
You do realize the Ottoman Empire was around until ww1, where it was defeated by the allied powers. I didn’t realize the genghis khan ruled every allied nation in ww1.
I'm afraid you're wrong. The word Khan has nothing to do with a Muslim leader. It came from central/south Asia and just so happens that it's now the most common SURNAME in a country with majority of Muslims (i.e. Pakistan). The Mongol Empire were not Muslims, yet had used the title all over and throughout.
It is a very common name in Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Iran.
You will NEVER find the title within the Arab-speaking Muslim countries, neither in North Africa, nor on the Arabian Penninsula, where Islam was actually originally born.
As for "Khalifa", Arab/Muslim rulers gave themselves the title because they also were heads of the Sharia (Muslim constitution) where they controlled the laws according to the Islamic religion. the King of Morocco uses the title to this day.
No and no. There are federal Republics where the leader is not called the President, like Germany (there's a president but he/she only has a ceremonial role, the actual political leader is the Chancellor) and "state" is too vague a term. It usually is a synonym of "country" and most countries don't have a governor as their leader. Some countries use the word "state" to name their subdivisions, like the US, but that's not its general meaning, so I think it's better not to change the quiz.
US state needs to be specified to get the answer 'governor'. If it said Australian state, the answer would be 'premier'. The word state by itself just means polity, which could lead to most answers in the quiz.
they should accept fuehrer which is the actual german way of not using the ä,ö or ü. but fuhrer is just wrong. did you know that schwül means humid and schwul means gay? now you know.
Viceroy is not very common used in Spanish colonies.... just saying i come from one and i've never heard that term for our history. More used by the British empire.
Mongolia has not used the name KHAN for its ruler since at least 1924 (with the death of the Bogd Khaan and the founding of the Mongolian People's Republic). The current ruler is a President (in English) - in Mongol, (transliterated), Mongol Ulsyn Yerönkhiilögch. If the word Khan is the answer, the question should specify mediaevel Mongolia, or Mongol Empire.
Why is it any more ridiculous than calling someone "chairman"? In both cases, "chair" represents the position being held, "man" just specifies that it's a person doing it, which really can be kind of assumed.
No. The archbishop is head of an archdiocese. Only an auxiliar bishop needs a titular see. To be totally correct, the head of a diocese would be the diocesane bishop (Episcopus dioecesanus), but normally you only speak about the bishop of ...
There are also some bishops who are made into archbishops in a personal sense. That does not mean they are in a region that normally would have an archbishop. There are then regions that are automatically headed by an archbishop. Cincinnati is an archdiocese and is automatically headed by an archbishop while Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Youngstown, and Steubenville are just regular diocese and headed by a regular bishop. Cleveland and Columbus have both had people who were made into archbishops in their own right.
Russia didn't have tsars after 1721, when Peter the Great renamed it into "Emperor of All Russia". Tsars were only the leader 1547-1721, after which it was "emperor". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar.
Your answer for Mongolia stopped being current in the early 17th century - you might want to acknowledge that it's a historic question, as you do for e.g. Iran, Japan.
Iran's current leader is also called "Supreme Leader". Was hoping to see it, wasn't aware that Kim had the same title but I've certainly heard him being called that before. I always thought it was sarcastic.
No. There were only six triumvirs, all during the first century B.C., as the Republic was collapsing. In each case, their power was more in the form of influence and resources than formal political office (Most were senators, but as far as I remember, only Julius Caesar held the highest office of consul). The consular office went back to the formation of the republic and was the highest recognized elected office, except in times of crisis when a dictator may be chosen.
Is there a better suggestion? It's true that lots of countries have Presidents, many of them you could describe as the "leader" (and some of them, not); is there a wording that can concisely describe what these countries necessarily have in common that excludes other countries? Or do you just mean, you wish a different country had been chosen for the answer "President"?
There were loads of countries on this quiz, not just America. Sure, there are other countries whose leaders use the term 'president' but the same is true for some of a few of the other words here as well.
Wow. 3 months ago, i took this, i got SEVEN, missed PHARAOH, today got all of them, you are lying if you say that Jetpunk doesn't make you smarter. THANK YOU JETPUNK
Strange that for one category, the answer is Kaiser (German for emperor) while emperor isn't accepted, while for another, the desired answer is chancellor and the German translation Kanzler isn't even accepted. Personally, I think Kaiser shouldn't even be the answer at all - on English Wikipedia, Kaiser Wilhelm is referred to as "Wilhelm II, German Emperor".
Technically a parliamentary nation has a leader that’s not the head of the government, which you arguably call “prime minister” (that’s not always the case). Italy(parliamentary republic) for example has the Presidente della Repubblica, who is the guarantor of the constitution, and the UK(parliamentary monarchy) has the Queen. Most of the time they don’t have actual power, they’re just the face of the country.
"Nesut" could be an alternate answer for Egypt, the word pharaoh wasn't in use until the 18th dynasty and literally means "Great House", whereas Nesut just means "king" literally and was consistently used across Egyptian history.
of fresh air to many). The differences between the gender-neutral and
traditional appellations don't amount to a hill of beans!
It's a very simple and effortless thing to do, and it makes such a difference to use more inclusive language (it's amazing how the subconscious mind works), and yet they act like it's the most arduous task!
And they say the other group are the weak and easily offended ones!
same with the you must be fun at parties, often the original comment is actually interesting and has a good point, but yea, sometimes quite boring or a bit too anal/nitpicking. But why the need to trash somebody just because you found their remark boring. That is soo childish, sadly often it is adults making these remarks...
I think changing words like "chairman" is a bit weird, but I don't see an issue with using "they" instead of "he or she" every time. Doesn't hurt anyone, it's less of a mouthful and being nonspecific can help avoid people making assumptions about a person before meeting them. It's kinda cool honestly
really venice
It was an unecessary change that create more sexism than it ever solved. The same applies to sportsman.
It would be life everyone demanding we change woman because it has the word man in it.
this got too long QvQ
It is a very common name in Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Iran.
You will NEVER find the title within the Arab-speaking Muslim countries, neither in North Africa, nor on the Arabian Penninsula, where Islam was actually originally born.
As for "Khalifa", Arab/Muslim rulers gave themselves the title because they also were heads of the Sharia (Muslim constitution) where they controlled the laws according to the Islamic religion. the King of Morocco uses the title to this day.
I don't think it should be shortened
Chancellor in germany was used between ww1 and ww2 as well as afterwards. It would make more sense to say german republic rather than modern germany