It’s not about adapting to change. It’s just as valid to tell a kid they can’t use “good” and “bad” in whatever they’re writing or discussing. The adaptation is understanding that those slang words essentially amount to the same things because that’s how kid’s slang works. You’re not conveying any rich meaning by repeating sigma over and over for whatever you think is good and mid for bad.
On that list the only complex idea is mewing, but the fact that it’s complex means the kids who didn’t understand it’s complexity have stripped it out. That’s because it’s not, in of itself, an actual slang term.
It’s not about adapting to change. It’s just as valid to tell a kid they can’t use “good” and “bad” in whatever they’re writing or discussing. The adaptation is understanding that those slang words essentially amount to the same things because that’s how kid’s slang works. You’re not conveying any rich meaning by repeating sigma over and over for whatever you think is good and mid for bad.
On that list the only complex idea is mewing, but the fact that it’s complex means the kids who didn’t understand it’s complexity have stripped it out. That’s because it’s not, in of itself, an actual slang term.
I disagree, I think the slang does convey rich meaning to the correct informal audience.
I would like to believe the slang is important code for another demographic that people can switch to.
As crazy as it may sound, I think depriving or deminishing the slang creates a divide culturally.
You’re mixing up kids slang with code switching. I don’t find them to be equivalent at all. That’s the greater point I was making.
Then I fundamentally disagree. I think slang is a form of code switching.