#BanBossy

[mikoyan29]

are you serious? you may as well oppose female since it contains male. Fireman/postmen etc is more reasonable to object to, albeit my personal opinion is there are better things to be dealing with first. ( for example, there is a pay gap between women and men.)

I'm just thinking back to the early days of the PC movement. Instead of women, you had womyn. Instead of he and she, you had sie. I forget some of the other ones. Then of course you had Freedom Fries in the early 2000's and people protesting over French's mustard...never mind that French was a person's last name rather than the nationality.

And no, I'm not serious. Words are like any other tool.....

[HYHYBT]

I think words like "sie" are intended more as replacement pronouns for people who don't fit either "he" or "she" entirely for one reason or another; it would be rude to refer to a person as "it."

[Bloodsoul]

If I remember correctly (and I probably don't), "woman" was derived from "wife/wif/wyf man" effectively meaning "female person," while a "male person" would have been called a "wer/were" (where the words "werewolf" and "weregild" originate from). So at some point it would appear that "man" was gender neutral?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got Sumer Is Icumen In stuck in my head… ×_×

[Mr Hero]

I think words like "sie" are intended more as replacement pronouns for people who don't fit either "he" or "she" entirely for one reason or another; it would be rude to refer to a person as "it."

We can't have "she" either because it has "he" in it.

[wolfie]

I'm just thinking back to the early days of the PC movement. Instead of women, you had womyn. Instead of he and she, you had sie.

And some of the people using those terms would be the type to swim up to a Great White and berate it for discrimination - since it was a MAN-eating shark.

[s_stabeler]

And some of the people using those terms would be the type to swim up to a Great White and berate it for discrimination - since it was a MAN-eating shark.

the amusing thing is that Great White sharks actually do tend to attack men more than women.

[the_std]

the amusing thing is that Great White sharks actually do tend to attack men more than women.

This is likely because men engage in more activities that make them appealing to great whites. Think of any activity that requires you to put on a wet suit and be in deep enough waters to support a great white - extreme sports, research diving, treasure hunting, all of that kind of thing? Usually male-dominated. Therefore the numbers are going to skew towards men.

It's not like sharks are looking at a man and a woman, treading water, and saying, "That one has an extra hot dog! I'll eat HIM!"

[s_stabeler]

surprisngly enough, no. I'm talking about when a man or a woman is already in a situation where they could be attacked by a Great White, they are more likely to attack a man. I don't know why ( and it isn't a massive difference) but it happens.

[the_std]

Really? I'd be very interested in seeing that study - I love this kind of stuff.

The only info I could find was a Daily Mail article explaining some cool shark facts, but they say that generally, attack levels correlated with the demographics more likely to engage in activities that bring them into shark territory during their peak hunting times.

The Daily Mail article got their information from the International Shark Attack File, maintained by the Florida Museum of Natural History. However, I was unable to find any information that backs up your statement. Admittedly, I didn't look too deeply, as I'm at work, but if you can give me more info, I'd love to see it.

[TheHuckster]

My best guess is men have a different scent than women, and sharks are more attracted to that scent.

[s_stabeler]

Really? I'd be very interested in seeing that study - I love this kind of stuff.

The only info I could find was a Daily Mail article explaining some cool shark facts, but they say that generally, attack levels correlated with the demographics more likely to engage in activities that bring them into shark territory during their peak hunting times.

The Daily Mail article got their information from the International Shark Attack File, maintained by the Florida Museum of Natural History. However, I was unable to find any information that backs up your statement. Admittedly, I didn't look too deeply, as I'm at work, but if you can give me more info, I'd love to see it.

unfortunately, it wasn't a study, and the book I was reading didn't mention sources (mainly due to being a book for kids) and it looks like I might have misread it, now I've checked the book again- it looks like it's talking about shark attack statistics in general. it's still quite a difference from what it says (the book says it is 13 times more likely. is that accurate?)

[siead_lietrathua]

it could just be, if it were a typically-sized man and women side by side, the man would look like the bigger volume of meat.

[bex1218]

My best guess is men have a different scent than women, and sharks are more attracted to that scent.

I would think that, too. Sharks have good smelling senses. If they can track a single drop of blood miles away, I could see them sensing pheromones.

[Mytical]

I accidentally started a new thread on this, so I am moving what I posted there here, and adding to it.

Ok. I run the risk of offending some people here, but I say what is on my mind... you have been warned.

Recently there has started a movement to ban the word bossy. The thing about this is, it is put out as if ONLY females get called bossy, and it is a female ONLY thing. I can assure you I was called bossy as a child. I am not, nor have ever been a female. However, this is the part that really gets my goat. If I say "That is the stupidest thing I ever heard." or a more polite version thereof... I would get labeled as a misogynist. If I make the point that guys also are called this.. Misogynist. That there are worse things to be called. Misogynist. Basically if i speak out against this in any way shape or form.. I am a misogynist. So arguments against this are not even allowed? Or only women can speak out against this? I.. just ... *facepalm*

Link : http://banbossy.com/

Added Part.
I say ban the word misogynist. Think of the poor children boys. How hurtful and painful it would be to be called this. Worse it could have a unwanted effect on their poor immature brains. After being called such horrible, horrible things, they might get angry and rebel, becoming more and more misogynist. Wouldn't want that. So since it can offend those poor children, we must ban it, and never speak the word again. Right??

[s_stabeler]

oh a related matter, where do people get off calling all opponents bigots of some variety of another? same for shutting down people who are not 'victims' from being part of a debate on something. Again, so the opinions of other people are not valid? were the opinions of men dismissed during women's suffrage? was the opinion of white people dismissed during the Civil rights era?