Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Jul 2009 12:09 UTC
Permalink for comment 372599
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-10-02
Hmm... Man used to mean "human being" but at some point turned into a gender-specific term.
In old days werman meant "male human" and wyfman (or wífman or similar spellings) meant "female human) ('woman' which is a worn down form of wyfman).
Just reintroduce werman for male humans and man will suddenly be gender-neutral again.
That said, if you start using "it" in relation to women, you're your own. I'll sit and eat pizza and drink a beer while the women abuse you :p
EDIT: You completely forgot the parallel to Life of Brian... *sigh* Svenskere har bare ingen kultur
---dylansmrjones
*** Besides that, patents should be abolished ***
Edited 2009-07-09 16:22 UTC