Seven Phrases Which Greatly Irritate Me

I have a tendency to get annoyed by things, people and, most often, things said by people. This is by no means a complete list, but these are seven of the top offenders. It’s long and it’s ranty, so read it only if you want to, but you have been warned.

1. First world problems
This one really bugs me, perhaps more than any other on this list. If you’re fortunate enough to be unfamiliar with the term, it’s used in response to somebody complaining about their life, to remind them that there are people out there with much worse problems, and that we’re very privileged compared to many others, such as those starving to death in the third world.
While I accept the obvious truth to this, I think it’s a needlessly aggressive thing to say to someone, and very dismissive of their troubles. When I complain that it’s exceedingly hot on any particular day, or that my PS3 has stopped working and I have to carry it over a mile to the repair shop on said exceedingly hot day, I am fully aware that there are many people with much more serious problems. Does that mean I’m not allowed to complain about my troubles? No, it doesn’t. By extension, you could reprimand a seriously ill child for complaining that she only gets four square meals a week, by reminding her that there are some who only get two. Only the person worst off in the whole world would then be allowed to bemoan their situation, according to this idea. Just because others have bigger problems doesn’t make mine any less significant.
I often take for granted the advantages I have in life, but that doesn’t mean I can’t or shouldn’t moan when things go wrong. If you don’t like it, you don’t have to listen to me, but don’t tell me “first world problems.” It’s dismissive and it’s patronising, and I will not appreciate it, nor will it help these far worse-off people about whom you seem so concerned.
(I should also mention that some people use the phrase to make it clear that they are aware that their own problems are somewhat trivial compared to some others’. I don’t really have a problem with this, it’s just when it’s used towards other people.)

2. A bad worker blames his tools
I’m sure that there exist bad workers who have placed blame for their shoddy work on their innocent tools, but what about competent workers with inadequate tools? There must be plenty of them out there, too. Are they bad workers due to their tools? According to this phrase, yes they are.
Again, the phrase itself contains some truth and makes sense; it’s the way it’s often used that annoys me. Someone tries to do something, fails, and claims it’s due to the equipment they’re using. Someone else will then utter the phrase, and look like a right prick. What makes you so sure that it applies in this scenario? Things break and things fail to work properly, with far too much frequency for my liking. It is very possible that the person would be more than capable of completing the job with better tools and/or materials. Don’t be such a dismissive presumptuous tosspot.

3. What’s for you’ll not go by you
I’m not sure if this is just a Scottish saying, or if it’s used more widely, but it essentially means that whatever doesn’t work out wasn’t meant to be, and that you’ll get what’s coming to you if you’re patient. It’s often said as a means of comforting somebody (see a theme developing here?) when they miss out on a job they wanted, split up with a partner, or are outbid on an ebay auction at the last second.
In these situations, I would not feel in the least bit comforted by such a platitude. You’re essentially being told that the thing you really wanted wasn’t for you. I get the idea behind it: to make people feel better in a time of severe disappointment. It’s based on nothing, though; you could miss by seconds the bus on which your perfect life-partner was travelling, or sleep in on the morning of an interview for a job you’d have aced if you’d been there on time. I don’t believe in fate, and that works both ways. The universe, to paraphrase Homer Simpson, is “just a bunch of stuff that happens.” Things that are for you could be whizzing by you all the time.
I suspect that we humans just find it quite difficult to comfort others who are down, and feel awkward doing so, so we often just turn to the few stock phrases we have for such occasions, with limited success.

4. YOLO
This annoys me more because of its prominence than the message it conveys. The phrase “you only live once,” is essentially fine (although it might upset people who believe in reincarnation, and perhaps James Bond fans) if you take it as an encouragement to live life to the full, which I believe is its primary purpose. I’m all for that, although it’s not something I have always applied to my own life, mainly due to my laziness. It’s not an especially long sentence, though, and I don’t really see the need to condense it to those two extremely irritating syllables. Those who advocate not wasting a second of their precious time on this earth may attempt to justify it as a time-saver, but I would counter by saying that you might as well not say anything at all, even something as short as “YOLO,” but just get on with carpeing all the diem you can get your mitts on.
In any case, it’s not usually uttered by people actually making the most of their tragically short lives, it’s a phrase more often used by tweens looking for a reason to drink their body weight or go to somewhere ultra-life-affirming, like “the mall.”

5. No use crying over spilt milk
If taken literally, then yes, this is entirely accurate. Nothing will be gained by crying over some milk that has been spilt, and it would look rather pathetic were you to do so. Unless, of course, it was the last of your milk, and you lost your arm as a result, which would be both very painful and highly detrimental to your remaining years.
But then, there’s not really any point crying about anything, is there? It’s a natural human response to times of sadness and, even if you feel that nobody should cry unless they are at a funeral or the Grand Canyon, the act of crying doesn’t actually achieve anything, even in these extreme situations. It’s just something you do, or don’t do, depending on whether or not a small horse has recently died.
Even if we leave that aside, it also tends to trivialise whatever the person to whom it is said is actually upset about. The phrase is usually used while comforting somebody who is sad about something. It won’t (usually) be as trivial as spilt milk, or as serious as somebody’s death, but it will be something that has affected the person. It could be that they’re having a bad day or week, and the thing (which seems small to you) is just the latest in a long line of things, which have piled up and contributed to their cumulative misery. Telling someone they shouldn’t be sad has a very low success rate (I imagine), much as saying people shouldn’t be nervous, when they already are.

6. Can I steal that?
I’ve noticed an increase in people saying this over the last couple of years, and have even caught myself saying it on occasion. I have since made a conscious effort to stop, and am happy to report that I have suffered no relapse.
To use the word “steal” in this context does not really mean to steal something. It’s an (allegedly quirky) alternative for “borrow,” or just “take” if it refers to a foodstuff, which you have no intention of returning. I’d much prefer someone to just take a few of my chips than to borrow them, returning them after having eaten them.
This question makes no logical sense, and there is no correct way to answer it. If you say “yes,” and the person takes whatever the item may be, they have not stolen it at all, for they had your permission. If you say “no,” and they don’t take it, they appear to show none of the resolve and determination required for actual thievery.
If you say “no,” and the person takes the thing anyway, that is the only way that it could be said to be stealing. In this scenario, however, they may as well have not bothered asking if their original intention was to actually steal the object. In fact, the vast majority of thefts do not begin with the question “can I steal that?” since this is only likely to draw attention to the burglary, something that makes it far easier to thwart.
In short, since the act of stealing requires there to be no consent for the thing in question to be taken, you cannot ask to steal something. It makes no sense. Please stop saying it.

7. Tumblrisms
As I have stated before, I do not care for the term ‘grammar Nazi;’ I much prefer ‘grammar enthusiast.’ The Nazis were bad people who went around doing bad things. People who correct others’ grammar may be annoying, but if you had paid attention in school, nobody would have any reason to teach you when to use apostrophes and when you should just not bother. You can say ‘grammar police’ if you must, but only if people like myself are permitted to arrest you, lock you up and charge you with criminal assault on the English language. The rules are there for a reason; use them.
I have accepted that, due to the development of cyber-culture, there are new words being created all the time. Some of them are required for the new technologies and so on which go with that, and some are new terms for things which have long existed, but for which there was no term, or no widely-used one. I have used many of these myself, and have no real problem with it in theory. Some, however, are new words for things for which there were already words. I see no need for them, and I don’t like them.
As much as I love Tumblr (and I do), the website and its users are partly responsible for this phenomenon. The word ‘fandom’ has sprung up from nowhere over the last few years, and it’s one of the worst offenders, in my opinion. ‘Fanbase’ already existed and, as far as I know, there’s nothing wrong with that word. There are plenty of warring ‘fandoms’ all over Tumblr, or so I gather from the little I see of it (I tend to stay away from conflict on the Internet because I’m not 14). For instance, fans of Harry Potter seem to have a rivalry of sorts with fans of Twilight (or, as I like to call it, ‘Buffy For Morons’). They argue over which books are better, which films are better, which characters, etc. I see absolutely no point in this, especially since there’s absolutely no contest between the two fictional universes. If you love something so much, go and love it, don’t have a go at people who love a different thing. If those people love Twilight, then if you must do something, pity them. Pity them as you read and analyse those multi-layered Snape/Dumbledore conversations again and again, for they will never know. The terms ‘fandom’ and ‘fanbase’ seem to me to be different in one way only: one encourages division and rivalry, and the other does no such thing. When you’re on your deathbed, you are never going to think “I wish I’d spent more time arguing with those jumped-up Twihards on Tumblr.” Carpe diem, seize the day, make your lives extraordinary, etc.
‘Cosplay’ is another word which really bothers me, and which there was no need to invent. What is suddenly wrong with ‘dressing up?’ Everyone knows what that means, just say it. When I first heard the term, I thought it referred to dressing up in a sexual role-playing context, but no, it just means dressing up as a cowboy or something. I’ve also seen it used as a noun, as in “here’s a picture of me in my Spider-Man cosplay from Hallowe’en.” I don’t think it’s a huge leap for me to assume that the ‘cos’ comes from the word ‘costume,’ which would be a perfectly acceptable and much more widely understood word to use there. The language already exists; you do not need to reinvent it with your new, slightly-different-from-the-old-words words.
Also, stop using ‘feels’ as a noun. It’s not a noun; ‘feelings’ is the appropriate noun. When you say you are experiencing ‘all the feels,’ it would take another second to add in the extra three letters, and nobody would hate you. (I suspect you’re not actually feeling all of the feelings, but that’s another issue for another day.) You could also say ‘emotions,’ another pre-existing word which everyone knows.