White privilege has played a roll, according to Yahoo! Style:
I’m just wondering what kind of roll it was. Was it a Kaiser roll, an onion roll, or an egg roll? I’m also wondering if an editor played a role in this homophonic hilarity.
It’s become almost a daily occurrence at Yahoo! Style: the inability to form possessive of a plural noun:
What the heck is so hard about this? If you’re writing about one couple, it’s couple’s. If more than one couple, it’s couples’. If you’re really confused, it’s couples’s and it’s wrong.
While I’m pondering the reason for that common mistake, perhaps you’ll solve another mystery for me: Why did the writer (and presumably her editor) refer to a boy with the pronoun her? Is this a transgender thing?
I’m not surprised anymore when I see that writers for Yahoo! Style have no idea how to make a possessive out of a plural noun. It happens nearly every day:
So, the writer and editor didn’t know that athletes’s makes no sense (they should have written athletes’). What surprises me is the fact that they thought they needed to make it clear that it was physical bodies, and not imaginary bodies, that are the focus of “microagressions” (they should have written microaggressions).
The Duggar family, known in the States for their reality TV show, their strict fundamental beliefs, and their overly large family, is renting space to a religious tenant.
The Yahoo! Style article doesn’t mention if the renter is living with the Duggars. But renting to a Christian is certainly in keeping with the family’s religious tenets.