darkblue

But that would be "science" and, as hepclassic has so perfectly pointed out, "science" is a paternal construct. Her suggestion is that nothing be done at all so that chemical differences between male and female persons be eliminated naturally. Males would automatically and naturally develop more female hormones (and possibly a womb), if only social constructs were to be eliminated from life. Makes perfect sense to me.

In Philadelphia, one must be particularly careful about these matters. It's been said that there is an inordinate amount of cross-dressing in that city.

Doing your Bill Cosby routine again, huh.

Why? "Female" is not an occupation. Neither is "male". It's one's biological gender.

How so?

You should know if you insulted him or not. If I say I think someone is wrong - is that an insult?

Like who? Can you give us an example of an insult you've received on this board?

Woo-hoo! For once it's not me responsible for stimulating the old personal attacks plea to the moderator.

The masculine equivalent of sorceress and murderess are sorcerer and murderer. Waitress and waiter can also be cited as examples. Notice the 'er' at the ends. While "actman" was quite a humorous suggestion by SansFin - a more proper word would be 'acter' as a masculine form for the feminine 'actress'. Actor (or, not er) is a gender-neutral term and is applicable to both male and female. Actress is perfectly fine to use if one is speaking of a female actor, though some females might prefer the gender-neutral term if they are being spoken about. By the way, is it true that stewardess is now an obsolete term? I believe 'flight attendant' is now the correct terminology - does that apply to 'steward' as well?

Telling the truth and telling lies are both freedom of speech. I sometimes complain about the lying, though.

I believe that the principal aspect of the movie that provokes the greatest resentment from "blacks" (and probably many "whites" as well) is what has been termed "the Negro dialect". I can understand that many people just don't want to hear this rather pronounced affectation, finding it both inaccurate and demeaning. Some will counter that they've truly known people who've spoken that way, but that doesn't mean that everyone is okay with it being represented as it is in a Disney movie. For some reason, this aspect has not been highlighted much in this discussion - and yet I don't think there's a more obvious example of why this movie is known to rub so many African-Americans the wrong way. But, Disney could release the movie on DVD anyway. There's no law preventing it. And it probably will at some point. After all, the movie has seen many re-releases since 1946 (1956, 1972, 1973, 1980, 1986). But given the problematic response that is always attached to a greater or lesser degree - depending on the moment in time - it's a decision that the suits at Disney are having a great deal more thought about than most of their product.

I sure as hell would. I'm not here because of anything those a$$holes did. I'm here because Canada is a part of the Commonwealth and was very much so when my grandfather came from England as one of the Dr. Bernardo children back in the 1910's.

I've always said the "founding fathers" were a-holes.

Have you looked at tonight's schedule?

As Vautrin said, almost all of them. It's pretty darned hard to be satisfied with the movie if you've read the book first. If you've not read the book, the movie will often seem quite good. But I'm one of those weirdo's who enjoyed 'Return to Oz', so what do I know?

No, seriously, Dargs. Which creature's name are we not permitted to read?

and Brer what?

Wow. You're pretty kweer for Ben Franklin, ay? Must be the pantaloons.

He'd be a little decayed, don't cha think?

Yes, it was gone for the month of August. It will be again for the month of February. This is to allow two annual monthly traditions to take place. One is known as 'Summer Under the Stars' and the other is known as 'Oscar Month'. 'Underground' is back now.

Just because people disagree with you doesn't mean you're being bullied.

If one finds that their opinion is often a minority one, I can understand how they might begin to feel that there's something unfair about that. But it's not unfair. It's just each person saying what they think; feel; prefer. Whichever "camp" one finds oneself in - minority, majority, unique - it's all just people expressing themselves and hopefully entertaining the other members.

I don't see it as anyone telling anyone else what to think. No matter what the topic, if the way one person thinks is different from what another thinks, each wishes to represent by posting. It's only fair.

Well, at least you can communicate with yourself, if no one else.

Looks drunk to me.