Re: People unclear on the subject

On Sat, 10 May 2008 10:05:45 -0700, "Brion K. Lienhart"
<brionl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>> Right.   And male canines are also recognizable.   A century ago, male
>> canines were called dogs and female canines were called *****es.
>> 
>> I know of people who call all foals "colts".   I suppose the language
>> is changing.
>
>It's a male character, in a female body. It's not language changing, 
>it's ****ing ignorant morons who are too arrogant to care whether they 
>have basic things correct or not. 

And for a while that was used for people who called a ***** a dog. But
today's language is the right one and will last forever, right?

>If Jessica Alba was in a movie with 
>Michael Dorn's voice, and everybody just treated her as a man, you 
>wouldn't think that was strange? It would be different if it was 
>post-modern ironic man-bull trapped in a girl-cow body, but it's not. 
>It's just plain stupidness.