Transparent Moderation Log & Site Topics - Part I

I think AmericanWay$ should be given a second chance. He has a wealth of knowledge that this forum really can't live without.

Originally Posted by Stazy

Click to expand...

I think AmericanWay$ should be given a second chance. He has a wealth of knowledge that this forum really can't live without.

WHO is your avatar?

I think AmericanWay$ should be the B&S moderator.

Originally Posted by RJman

Click to expand...

WHO is your avatar?

Camilla Belle. Rawr.

Originally Posted by Baron

Click to expand...

Camilla Belle. Rawr.
That's right. You might remember her from such films as 10,000 BC, When a Stranger Calls, and The Lost World: Jurrasic Park.

Originally Posted by Stazy

Click to expand...

That's right. You might remember her from such films as 10,000 BC, When a Stranger Calls, and The Lost World: Jurrasic Park.
As long as J is granting wishes, I think he needs to change Stazy's avatar to this, and permanently:

Atheists cannot disprove that God is a man.

Originally Posted by j

Click to expand...

Atheists cannot disprove that God is a man.
While in Catholic elementary school I remember my late-20s female teacher having a debate with us during a religion class. Her question was why do Christians refer to God as "He" when no one knows God's sex and the He could very well be a She. WELL, THERE'S THE ******* PROOF ALREADY. It's called the "Asian/White/Black/Hispanic Girl Appreciation Thread."

Originally Posted by whodini

Click to expand...

While in Catholic elementary school I remember my late-20s female teacher having a debate with us during a religion class. Her question was why do Christians refer to God as "He" when no one knows God's sex and the He could very well be a She. WELL, THERE'S THE ******* PROOF ALREADY. It's called the "Asian/White/Black/Hispanic Girl Appreciation Thread."
God could be a lesbian!

Originally Posted by Stazy

Click to expand...

That's right. You might remember her from such films as 10,000 BC, When a Stranger Calls, and The Lost World: Jurrasic Park.

I don't think anyone saw those movies.

Originally Posted by whodini

Click to expand...

While in Catholic elementary school I remember my late-20s female teacher having a debate with us during a religion class. Her question was why do Christians refer to God as "He" when no one knows God's sex and the He could very well be a She. WELL, THERE'S THE ******* PROOF ALREADY. It's called the "Asian/White/Black/Hispanic Girl Appreciation Thread."
My understanding, more from etymological perspective, is that 'man' is really a gender-neutral derivation of the Old English words 'waifman' for male and 'wifman' for female. ~Huntsman

Originally Posted by Huntsman

Click to expand...

My understanding, more from etymological perspective, is that 'man' is really a gender-neutral derivation of the Old English words 'waifman' for male and 'wifman' for female. ~Huntsman
Yes, and to elaborate upon that, "the term "man" (from Proto-Germanic mannaz "man, person") and words derived from it can designate any or even all of the human race regardless of their gender or age. This is indeed the oldest usage of "man". The word developed into Old English man, mann "human being, person," (cf. also German Mann, Old Norse maðr, Gothic manna "man"). It is derived from a PIE base *man- (cf. Sanskrit/Avestan manu-, Russian muzh "man, male"). Sometimes, the word is connected with the root *men- "to think" (cognate to mind). Restricted use in the sense "adult male" only began to occur in late Old English, around 1000 AD, and the word formerly expressing male sex, wer had died out by 1300 (but survives in e.g. were-wolf and were-gild). The original sense of the word is preserved in mankind, from Old English mancynn. In Old English the words wer and wyf (also wæpman and wifman) were what was used to refer to "a man" and "a woman" respectively, and "man" was gender neutral. In Middle English man displaced wer as term for "male human," whilst wyfman (which eventually evolved into woman) was retained for "female human." Man does continue to carry its original sense of "Human" however, resulting in an asymmetry sometimes criticized as sexist. In the 20th century, the generic meaning of "man" declined still further (but survives in compounds "mankind", "everyman", "no-man", etc), and it is probable that future generations will see it as totally archaic, and use it solely to mean "adult male". Interestingly, exactly the same thing has happened to the Latin word ****: in the Romance languages, homme, uomo, hombre, homem etc. have all come to refer mainly to males, with residual generic meaning." http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/man

Originally Posted by amerikajinda

Click to expand...

God could be a lesbian!

the rest of you seen quick to beat up on a school teacher.

Originally Posted by amerikajinda

Click to expand...

Yes, and to elaborate upon that, "the term "man" (from Proto-Germanic mannaz "man, person&quot

and words derived from it can designate any or even all of the human race regardless of their gender or age. This is indeed the oldest usage of "man". The word developed into Old English man, mann "human being, person," (cf. also German Mann, Old Norse maðr, Gothic manna "man&quot

. It is derived from a PIE base *man- (cf. Sanskrit/Avestan manu-, Russian muzh "man, male&quot

. Sometimes, the word is connected with the root *men- "to think" (cognate to mind). Restricted use in the sense "adult male" only began to occur in late Old English, around 1000 AD, and the word formerly expressing male sex, wer had died out by 1300 (but survives in e.g. were-wolf and were-gild). The original sense of the word is preserved in mankind, from Old English mancynn. In Old English the words wer and wyf (also wæpman and wifman) were what was used to refer to "a man" and "a woman" respectively, and "man" was gender neutral. In Middle English man displaced wer as term for "male human," whilst wyfman (which eventually evolved into woman) was retained for "female human." Man does continue to carry its original sense of "Human" however, resulting in an asymmetry sometimes criticized as sexist. In the 20th century, the generic meaning of "man" declined still further (but survives in compounds "mankind", "everyman", "no-man", etc), and it is probable that future generations will see it as totally archaic, and use it solely to mean "adult male". Interestingly, exactly the same thing has happened to the Latin word ****: in the Romance languages, homme, uomo, hombre, homem etc. have all come to refer mainly to males, with residual generic meaning." http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/man
Cool. Thanks.

I guess SuperUnderPantsman got spaminated?