FishFace

I try, and a lot of people don't appreciate it, so that means a lot :)

Yep, fair enough.

I think it's uncharitable to assume that, and the risk of assuming the best is tiny, whilst the risk of assuming the worst is everyone getting angry with each other for no reason. I don't know if OP is a man and I don't want to go checking every user's gender before deciding what I think about what they've said, and even if I did, I think there are situations where men can make the same light-hearted jokes as women - whether it's ok depends on a lot more than that.

That's more or less what I'd assumed you meant initially, but I similarly wasn't going to assume that without checking, because launching into an argument based on an assumption of what you meant could just lead to you getting angry with me, whilst the risk of me challenging my own assumption and waiting to see carried only the risk that I'd never know.

That sounds unpleasant.

I've mainly heard said by a person about herself, or from one woman to another, often as a way to make a joke of the sort that implied that they thought whatever task it was (that required the big girl pants) was big and difficult while acknowledging that it actually is not, e.g. "I put on my big girl pants and rang the council to tell them I need a new recycling bin"

If your bike is expensive enough it'll be targeted. People with very valuable bikes don't leave them in the same place repeatedly for that reason.

All the times I have heard it said, which is not that many, yes. It was said in a light-hearted and, dare I say, kind way :)

I think a lot of those robots are very expensive and liable to break the bones of onlookers when they go wrong...

If I had to guess (lots of guessing) it's like supposed to be a light-hearted expression like "big girl pants"

OK. For the record I couldn't tell whether you were actually talking about gendered language or something I was missing. I do also think when you purposefully say very little, inevitably people will make assumptions about what you "really meant" whether that's justified or not. Which I appreciate is annoying.

My guess is not exactly the same; it's that they've made the point they really mean many times, so by now they're bored of typing it out. Maybe they in fact expect people to understand the point they intend even though they haven't made it, based on people agreeing with them already, or having seen their posts already.

I have a guess at what your comment meant but find guessing at people's meanings error-prone and leads to pointless aggro when you can just ask them.

(Inviting people to guess at your meaning, by being deliberately vague or declining to clarify, I find similarly to lead to pointless aggro)

Why did you repeat the title?