The folicularly challenged writer rants well. I think he has done an “exceptional” job, except that the PCers have co-opted that word to mean exactly the opposite of what it once meant.
As a former journalist, the PC types were the bane of my existance.
As an editor, one of my reporters was upbraided for referring to the elected body of the city as “City Councilmen” a legal term in the election code. One of the people on the council was a woman. He thought referring to the “City Councilmen and Councilwoman” was awkward, and suggested a neutral “Councilthings”.
As for persons in this country without proper documentation, it seems to depend upon the origin: some arriving on our shores or slipping over our borders are “illegal aliens” while others are labeled “refugees” of some kind.
Has anyone determined what the meaning of “is” is?
The one thing that does seem odd to me is his insistence that a woman raping a man is ‘physiologically impossible’. It may be vanishingly rare, but, since the male sexual response is not entirely controlled by the will, it would certainly seem possible – given strong enough restraints and direct stimulation of the genitals.
I seem to remember reading that one pagan official, back in pre-Constantine days, found the Christian insistence that men should be chaste particularly amusing. He had a teenaged Christian boy stripped, bound, and thus assaulted by a prostitute. The offical then gloated that now the boy’s god would hate him, since he had had intercourse outside of marriage, so he might as well sacrifice to the Emperor.
The poor kid flung back that his God knew that it was against his will, and that he would never betray Christ, whereupon the enraged official had him martyred.
BTW, I tried to comment there, but it won’t let someone w/o a Livejournal account comment.
3 comments
Might want to add:
a very wordy rant.
Well worth the time, but make sure you have time to do it justice!
The folicularly challenged writer rants well. I think he has done an “exceptional” job, except that the PCers have co-opted that word to mean exactly the opposite of what it once meant.
As a former journalist, the PC types were the bane of my existance.
As an editor, one of my reporters was upbraided for referring to the elected body of the city as “City Councilmen” a legal term in the election code. One of the people on the council was a woman. He thought referring to the “City Councilmen and Councilwoman” was awkward, and suggested a neutral “Councilthings”.
As for persons in this country without proper documentation, it seems to depend upon the origin: some arriving on our shores or slipping over our borders are “illegal aliens” while others are labeled “refugees” of some kind.
Has anyone determined what the meaning of “is” is?
(WARNING ! Depraved subject matter mentioned !)
The one thing that does seem odd to me is his insistence that a woman raping a man is ‘physiologically impossible’. It may be vanishingly rare, but, since the male sexual response is not entirely controlled by the will, it would certainly seem possible – given strong enough restraints and direct stimulation of the genitals.
I seem to remember reading that one pagan official, back in pre-Constantine days, found the Christian insistence that men should be chaste particularly amusing. He had a teenaged Christian boy stripped, bound, and thus assaulted by a prostitute. The offical then gloated that now the boy’s god would hate him, since he had had intercourse outside of marriage, so he might as well sacrifice to the Emperor.
The poor kid flung back that his God knew that it was against his will, and that he would never betray Christ, whereupon the enraged official had him martyred.
BTW, I tried to comment there, but it won’t let someone w/o a Livejournal account comment.