So instead of "Good morning ma'am what can I get you?" or "That coffee is for him", I would say "Good morning friend, what can I get you?"
So instead of "Good morning ma'am what can I get you?" or "That coffee is for him", I would say "Good morning friend, what can I get you?"
That is quite beautiful. Well done. It had not occurred to me that the French "on" means "one". Although duh. I'm not that bright. :/
I'm glad she looks so put-together and polished. That is NOT the appearance of a beaten-down victim. :)
I was referring to the phrasing. Only in the post feminist era do we wish to eliminate gender specificity, so we do not say merely "he" as a generic second person singular. We say "he or she", or, evidently, "they". :)
Do you like Weird Al?
Why, thank you! Everyone is free to change their opinion as they get educated. :)
Yes, fine, y'all win! You have reversed a decade of perfect catholic grammar training! I don't need the other catholic horseshit either, so, you go with your happy trans self. :)
It's an open field. You can type whatever you want.
I am caving to the pluralists.
You split an infinitive! :)
Okay, okay, you pro-pluralists win. I give.
Okay, okay, I give. All of you pro-plurals win.
Hmmm... Okay. :)
"They" as a gender-neutral singular pronoun is grammatically incorrect. In the bad old days, the correct usage was "he", "his", or "him". However, in the post-feminist era, we have the bumbling "he or she", "his or her", and "him or her". I wish we had an equivalent of the French "on". Or why don't we just use "it"?…
Dear Lord, yes. I'm hung up on that, too.
That's me! Only my blue collar SO is a genius in his own right and (nearly) matches my earning potential.
Meh, we don't need to debate this. You can feel however you want about other people's tragedies; I can feel however I want. Just know that if you ever become an agent to other people's tragedies, the law and karma will get you.
No, it's not. Accidental deaths are meted out by fate. Murder is at the hands of a conscious person. To ask whether a murder victim deserved it implies that the murderer had the right to act solely as judge, jury, and executioner. What in hell would give an individual person, complete with follies and misjudgements of…
Are you fucking insane? Do you ask this of all victims of violent crimes? I wonder if they were bad enough characters to "deserve" it?
90 minutes a day is not unreasonable. I have two retired sled dogs who disagree with their retirement, so we run for 45 minutes every morning and talk a half-hour walk before bed. Just adding 15 mins on top of that is not insane. And I'm not crazy fit; just a devoted dog owner.