Whose vs Which

Sometimes the phrase of which is used as the possessive of which:Chicago is a city of which the attractions are many or Chicago is a city the attractions of which are many. The use of this phrase can often seem awkward or pretentious, whereas whose sounds more idiomatic:Chicago is a city whose attractions are many. Diccomtionary

Usage Note: It has sometimes been claimed that whose is properly used only as the possessive form of who and thus should be restricted to animate antecedents, as in a man whose power has greatly eroded. But there is extensive literary precedent for the use of whose with inanimate antecedents, as in The play, whose style is rigidly formal, is typical of the period. In an earlier survey this example was acceptable to a large majority of the Usage Panel. Those who avoid this usage employ of which: The play, the style of which is rigidly formal, is typical of the period. But as this example demonstrates, substituting of which may produce a stilted sentence. See Usage Notes at else, which, who. The free web dictionary

I've noticed in so many places the WRONG usage of 'whose' that it makes me sick. I do not know why, but it sticks out to me like a sore thumb. If you are talking about a thing in a way that dos not personify it, use 'that's' or rephrase the sentence.

This happens all over the place. I find it on blogs, newspapers, people seem to say it all the time. It is one of those things like 'paramount'. So many people have gotten it wrong for so long that they just change the definition because, why not. Who cars really? I mean what difference will it make in a hundred years when people speak a whole different language and try to decipher what the hell we were talking about in the ancient history of 1.5 lifetimes.

I know, I know. I'm the last one who should bitch about grammar. Both of the learned web institutions are wrong. You do not use 'whose' for a that or a which. GODDAMMIT!!!