We all know what a LoL is. Whether its used as averb, a noun, or otherwise we all know what it means. Apparently LeL, means the same thing, only it was invented by people who wanted to say the same thing without looking like they were saying the same thing. Which is fitting since that is exactly what a LeL under my proposed new defintion would do.
To wit, I propose that from here on out, LeL, will be an acronym just like LoL. A LeL is either “Loser enabling Language” or the type of person who uses LeL’s, which is a “loser enabling loser”
As an example of what I mean is the word “privilege” Now keep in mind, not everyone using the word “privilege” is a LeLing LeLer. If someone is using a positive form of the word in order to pitch you, then it isnt a LeLer LeLing. So for example if someone talk about the privileges you get from joining a book club, or becoming a trustee, this is not LeLing. However if someone is using “privilege” in way that makes it clear that one needs to be penitent for said privilege, then you’ve got your self a LeLing LeLer. If Someone claims that you’re “playing life on the easiest difficulty setting” then your listening to a LeLer LeL.
The key of course is that a LeLer will always try to make excuses for Loser’s, and to denigrate winners as having some ill defined privilege that makes thier “win” meaningless. So to a LeLer Micheal Jordan wasn’t dominant in basketball because of desire, drive, and countless thousands of hours of practice, study, and hard work. Oh no. No Sir. He was the beneficiary of “able privilege”. (and yes, for those of you have not heard, this is apparently a thing)
Another way to spot a LeLer, is that they HATE LoL’s. Most LeLer’s will first present themselves to you when trying to prevent LoL’s. Tell a joke and a LeLer will pop up likety split to explain why that LoL isn’t a LeL worthy LoL and thus is evil, and makes you evil for LoLing.
So remember internets, friends don’t let friends LeL.