Throw a bomb and...

[Fulanito de Tal]

...blow this ***** up. :che: iPATRIA O MUERTE!

Humanos todo el mundo :)

[bcbm]

please don't use the word '*****' on this forum, it is considered discriminatory language

[ColonelCossack]

please don't use the word '*****' on this forum, it is considered discriminatory language

To female dogs??? :confused:

[bcbm]

to women, obviously:sneaky:

[Fulanito de Tal]

please don't use the word '*****' on this forum, it is considered discriminatory language

Sorry. I wont do it again. :sleep:

I don't even remember writing this thread. I was hammered last night.

[gendoikari]

Sorry. I wont do it again. :sleep:

I don't even remember writing this thread. I was hammered last night.

Been there, done that, Got the T-shirt.

[Fulanito de Tal]

Been there, done that, Got the T-shirt.

I didn't get a t-shirt. Do I have to fill out an application, send an email, or present any proof? I'm a size large.

Also, I don't want to throw any bombs anywhere. I'm thinking that must have been a drunk metaphor that sucks.

[ColonelCossack]

to women, obviously:sneaky:

I know. But still. Normally it's like comparing bad things to things that are being discriminated against- so, for example, "you fight like a girl" (just an example). In this case, women and girls are being discriminated against, because the discriminatory remark's recipient's poor quality of fighting is being referred to the quality of fighting of women/girls.

In the above case, it's "blow that ***** up". This is comparing the person being described to a female dog- which discriminates against female dogs, because they are being compared to (assumedly) bad people; and to people (assumedly women, because of various social constructs and slang) because they are being compared to female dogs (whose name, for some reason, is synonymous with bad/spiteful female humans).

[Sam_b]

ColonelCossak, you are a complete moron.

So, tell me why in particular you are arguing about the use of a linguistic term which you already admit in the post above to be gendered? The clue is in the italics, son.

[gendoikari]

I didn't get a t-shirt. Do I have to fill out an application, send an email, or present any proof? I'm a size large.

Also, I don't want to throw any bombs anywhere. I'm thinking that must have been a drunk metaphor that sucks.

Well first your website that your Drunkposting on has to have a store...... Secondly you have to have access to your debit card while drunk, which is usually your first mistake.

also on the term "*****" what if we refer to men like bush, and the other republicans as Captialist dogs, would it then be okay to refer to palin as a Capitalist *****?

[ColonelCossack]

ColonelCossak, you are a complete moron.

Oh yeah, real polite.


So, tell me why in particular you are arguing about the use of a linguistic term which you already admit in the post above to be gendered? The clue is in the italics, son.

Dunno. i always seem to argue one side of an argument then contradict myself using the other side of the argument... It annoys me sometimes, too. Also the argument I was trying to put across was that in addition to the insult being gendered, It also had negative connotations to *****es (i.e. female dogs). But does it really matter? It's not like i was even being serious. Maybe I should have done a smiley.

edit: Also, i could be dogmatic by saying that "moron" could be seen as discriminatory since it is a medical term applying to someone with an IQ below a certain value- so in effect you yourself are doing the comparison thing which I was saying before. it would be like calling me "retard".

However, i won't.

[ColonelCossack]

Well first your website that your Drunkposting on has to have a store...... Secondly you have to have access to your debit card while drunk, which is usually your first mistake.

also on the term "*****" what if we refer to men like bush, and the other republicans as Captialist dogs, would it then be okay to refer to palin as a Capitalist *****?

That is a good point.

Am i doing it again?

[bcbm]

the word is considered discriminatory language. don't use it. it isn't up for argument. i'm just giving a heads up yall, take it or leave it, but don't say i didn't warn ya:(

[ColonelCossack]

No, I agree that it's discriminatory. I was just pointing something out. Jeez.