- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,816
- Reaction score
- 859
- Country
Update - they seem happy. Hard to understand why the tabloids gave her such a hard time, she seems like a very nice person.
Seems he just doesn't like Harry and Meghan much,
she's a fecking actorUpdate - they seem happy. Hard to understand why the tabloids gave her such a hard time, she seems like a very nice person.
Apparently not. That was my point. WTF is going on nowadays?point of order - are you allowed to say 'actress' in these enlightened days?
You'd better call her 'he' and a 'man' then.could be sexist.
Apparently not. That was my point. WTF is going on nowadays?
Frerkin ell....she is so miserablePlain but steady Camilla is the type you marry to look after the house and kids
point of order - are you allowed to say 'actress' in these enlightened days? could be sexist.
Technically Actor is gender neutral. Like footballer or politician. If it matters someone might be described as a male or female footballer but most of the time it's irrelevant.Logically then, we should expunge "female", "woman", and "girl" from use, and replace them with "male", "man", and "boy".
"Rachel" and "Meghan"? No, no no. "Barry" and "Dave" from now on.
That's not text speech. It is an abbreviation.The irony of complaining about the evolution of language, yet using text speak to do so.
That's not text speech. It is an abbreviation.
That would be because only men did those things.Technically Actor is gender neutral. Like footballer or politician. If it matters someone might be described as a male or female footballer but most of the time it's irrelevant.
For the same reason we don't call Meghan 'he' or a 'man' nor her grandmother-in-law the King.I'm sure someone somewhere cares about if they're called an Actor or an Actress. It doesn't make any difference to me so why not use Actor?
It doesn't make any difference to me so why not use Actor?