Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by tmsam 3720 days ago
In the chart of trends in how people meet, there is a suspicious uptick in "at a restaurant/bar" in the last few years... that is totally just a cover for people who met on Tinder and then got serious.
2 comments

Yep. I can brag to my friends I found hookups on Tinder, but I can't tell my parents I found my spouse there.

(If only because I want to avoid the "tinwhat?" discussion.)

Online dating doesn't really have any stigma anymore. People aren't shy about it.
> any stigmata anymore

I'm assuming this was a spell check issue. Stigma is the appropriate word here. Stigmata are these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigmata

stigmata is also just the plural of stigma; that usage hasn't disappeared yet.
Oh? Can you point me to an instance of that usage, where "stigmata" is used as a plural of "stigma" (meaning: a socially-ostracizing feature or trait), in a contemporary, edited publication?

A will grant that it's sometimes used in the medical literature to mean "a clear, diagnostic sign of some illness", but the allusion there is to the stigmata of Christianity.

I've never, ever seen it used to mean the plural of stigma as the word is commonly used in English.

i internalised it as the regular plural of stigma, so i'm guessing i've seen it in books. here's a 2010 Google books result from googling "societal stigmata". https://books.google.com/books?id=xXTcQ-TyK6MC&pg=PA947&lpg=...
OK, well done. I'm surprised it's still used by some writers in this manner, and it's very rare. It's definitely not the regular plural of "stigma".

Still, I was wrong.

It's just like idiom/idiomata.
Actually it's me being temporarily dyslexic! Let's still call it a typo. Thanks
It provides a market efficiency, but every new asset class introduces new inefficiencies.