Talk:own the libs

RFD discussion: August–December 2020
It just means "own the libs" literally, even though there happens to be an Internet habit of mocking non-liberals by saying "(doing whatever trivial thing) will surely own the libs" or suchlike. So there's nothing to define. Hypothetical similar example: suppose there is a meme where people photograph themselves staring in confusion at an everyday object and saying "I will use this to fix my car". That meme/catchphrase wouldn't change the meaning of "fix my car", which still just means repair a motor vehicle. Equinox ◑ 08:23, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Is the reported sarcastic use specific to this collocation that has the libs as the putatively defeated adversary, or can it more generally be associated with uses of in its slang sense of pwn?  --Lambiam 11:03, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Also, is this commonly used literally, without intended sarcasm? Otherwise, by WT:CFI, it can be included on its own merits. --Lambiam 11:28, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as sum of parts. It describes an intention to own the libs, even if it does not anticipate success.  In that way it is different from the CFI example .  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 11:44, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's own the libs by deleting this entry. Note that I've also seen "libs pwned" used before, which is switching the words around. PseudoSkull (talk) 11:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree with Equinox here, the words are literal and SOP even though the concept (but not any one specific phrase!) has become memetic, so delete. The concept is also expressed in other ways, including "trigger the libs" (which may be more common); "(own|trigger) (the|) (snowflakes|Dems)", etc. In line with what Vox says, there's no "sarcastic" meaning to define, even when people use it to mock the idea that doing a particular thing is worth it and/or will actually own libs. For example, a while ago someone tweeted a Trump 2020 facemask, saying something like "ok, I'll wear a face mask, see if liberals still like it" or something, and someone replied "if the knowledge that you are triggering a lib is what it takes to wear a mask in indoor spaces, then hey, i am so triggered right now, i have never been more triggered", and I see someone else mockingly said "the libs have never been more owned". The meaning is literal/SOP even when it's insincere/mocking.) - -sche (discuss) 03:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per all "delete" discussants. DCDuring (talk) 06:53, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, the usage note is subpar as well, because it typically suggests that there is more self-inflicted harm than harm to "the other team". The connotations with affective partisanship may be sociologically interesting, but nothing about it seems idiomatic or even interesting from a lexical perspective. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  12:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as SoP. — SGconlaw (talk) 13:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep 100% - Dentonius (my politics | talk) 17:28, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, SOP. J3133 (talk) 17:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. The "own the ... " construction is pretty common with other groups too, e.g. own the boomers, own the rightoids, etc., though libs are most commonly owned. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 17:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 16:48, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

"own the cons" (conservatives) is also sometimes seen
Equinox ◑ 03:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)