My computer continues it madness - the most recent perk is that the help bubbles are written with font size 1 or thereabouts - it's really just a few squirly lines and that is all
( Read more... )
Ignorant besserwissers who say things like "homosexuality can't be used about women because 'homo' means 'man'" in a superior tone. If you're going to be an ass, at least be an ass who knows the difference between Greek and Latin.
Ignoring the whole it's-a-different-friggin-language issue for a slight moment...by that argument, I wouldn't be a homo sapien. *Ahem* THIS is why I get pissy about the feminazis (as opposed to sane feminists) who want to change every word in the English language that is in any way male. I am still a part of mankind, thank you very much, and I am not insulted by the connection.
It's so silly. "Aha! You said mankind! Perpetuating patriarchal oppression!" Like there aren't actual acts of repression that should be dealt with instead.
'Sides, the Swedish word for human is feminine, so according to that logic men shouldn't be allowed to call themselves human...
The crap over woman/womyn is even worse.alara_rFebruary 15 2004, 08:19:29 UTC
Oh, tell me about it. People don't seem to realize that at some point in the language, *English* lost the distinction between "human" and "male" that used to be in it. "Man" *actually*, etymologically, means human
( ... )
Thank you kindly. I've even heard people bitching about the first step on the moon speech, "One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind." Yes, I know, he said it wrong and left out the 'a', so it came out being grammatically contradictory, but that's what he was *supposed* to have said. :)
And *I* am not insulted about it being a giant leap for mankind. I'd be insulted if they felt they had to add woman-kind, as if we were some sort of separate species. *ugh*
Oh, and can I just BITCH about the new rendition of the Star Trek monologue at the beginning of the episode? When ST:TNG came out, it was one of the first gripes I had. "To boldly go where no one has gone before."
Umm, BZZZZZZZZZT! To say no *man* has gone there before means no HUMAN. To say no ONE implies no sentience at all, which is blatantly a lie, since just before that he'd said, "To seek out new life and new CIVILIZATIONS." If they've got civilization, they're someone, neh? So to try to be politically correct, they've gone and insulted every sentient civilization they're out there to meet. Definitely a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater...and in this particular case, there wasn't even any dirty water!
Ignoring the whole it's-a-different-friggin-language issue for a slight moment...by that argument, I wouldn't be a homo sapien. *Ahem* THIS is why I get pissy about the feminazis (as opposed to sane feminists) who want to change every word in the English language that is in any way male. I am still a part of mankind, thank you very much, and I am not insulted by the connection.
Reply
'Sides, the Swedish word for human is feminine, so according to that logic men shouldn't be allowed to call themselves human...
Reply
Reply
Reply
And *I* am not insulted about it being a giant leap for mankind. I'd be insulted if they felt they had to add woman-kind, as if we were some sort of separate species. *ugh*
Reply
Umm, BZZZZZZZZZT! To say no *man* has gone there before means no HUMAN. To say no ONE implies no sentience at all, which is blatantly a lie, since just before that he'd said, "To seek out new life and new CIVILIZATIONS." If they've got civilization, they're someone, neh? So to try to be politically correct, they've gone and insulted every sentient civilization they're out there to meet. Definitely a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater...and in this particular case, there wasn't even any dirty water!
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment