Manholes are gender neutral now

klaaaz · 19-07-2019 10:12pm

Ted Johnson wrote: »

Haha no, men have never been pregnant.

Why force people to use pc language? Doesn't sound very liberal to me.

You don't have to use the term pregnant employee, the alternative to use is pregnant man or a pregnant woman. Hope you're not offended.

Ted Johnson · 19-07-2019 10:12pm

klaaaz wrote: »

You don't have to use the term pregnant employee, the alternative to use is pregnant man or a pregnant woman. Hope you're not offended.

I'll just use he or she. Wait, you actually said ''pregnant man'

hahahaha!

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 19-07-2019 10:13pm

What are we gonna call the classic 80s band “Men at work” now?

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:14pm

Ted Johnson wrote: »

I will continue to refer to them as manholes and you can refer to them how you like.

But I don't like the idea of the state compelling you to use certain language.

Thanks.

What means is the state proposing to enforce the use of this language. That's a claim that's been made repeatedly, so has anyone seen where they propose to e force it and punish non Compliance?

Ted Johnson · 19-07-2019 10:16pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Thanks.

What means is the state proposing to enforce the use of this language. That's a claim that's been made repeatedly, so has anyone seen where they propose to e force it and punish non Compliance?

You'll no doubt be sanctioned if you don't get with the program my bootlicking friend.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 19-07-2019 10:20pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Thanks.

What means is the state proposing to enforce the use of this language. That's a claim that's been made repeatedly, so has anyone seen where they propose to e force it and punish non Compliance?

C16 Canada.

Google it.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:20pm

Ted Johnson wrote: »

You'll no doubt be sanctioned if you don't get with the program my bootlicking friend.

Sure. Just show me where they said they will sanction People.

It should be a really easy request to fulfil because the main premise of the argument seems to be that the state is Compelling people to say things. Just show us where you hot that from.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:22pm

Hunky Monster wrote: »

C16 Canada.

Google it.

The Canadians are going to sanction people for their use of language in the US. This is more serious than I thought.

Any suggestion that the US is planning to sanction people to do with the manholes language?

Woodsie1 · 19-07-2019 10:24pm

klaaaz wrote: »

Men have become pregnant and have had babies

Wait,what?!!?

Ted Johnson · 19-07-2019 10:25pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sure. Just show me where they said they will sanction People.

It should be a really easy request to fulfil because the main premise of the argument seems to be that the state is Compelling people to say things. Just show us where you hot that from.

It will be banned from official documents issued by the city council so of course you will be punished if you don't go along with the newspeak.

How does this new policy benefit anyone?

Woodsie1 · 19-07-2019 10:28pm

klaaaz wrote: »

You don't have to use the term pregnant employee, the alternative to use is pregnant man or a pregnant woman. Hope you're not offended.

Too bad I caught your insane post before you edited it,but its still insane.
Where are these pregnant men?

Edit: Sorry it was another post and you doubled down on the pregnant man thing,insanity on display here for all to see.

blackcard · 19-07-2019 10:28pm

Will it be okay to use the term 'manly'? Or to call someone a male chauvinist pig?

Sittingpretty · 19-07-2019 10:30pm

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Wait,what?!!?

It’s infuriating isn’t it.

Men have never become pregnant and had babies because men do not have uteruses.

Women who identify as men have become pregnant and had babies. Not men. You are not a biological man just because you decide you want to be or you feel like a man. Ergo you are not a man becoming pregnant and having a baby.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:34pm

Ted Johnson wrote: »

It will be banned from official documents issued by the city council so of course you will be punished if you don't go along with the newspeak.

How does this new policy benefit anyone?

Private individuals will be punished if they do t go along with it?

I work in the public sector and there are loads of official terms that we use. Not a problem for me.

I don't know who benefits. I would have said nobody is harmed either but the twisted knickers in reaction to it might cause some harm. Do you consider yourself harmed by the change?

klaaaz · 19-07-2019 10:35pm

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Too bad I caught your insane post before you edited it,but its still insane.
Where are these pregnant men?

Edit: Sorry it was another post and you doubled down on the pregnant man thing,insanity on display here for all to see.

I didn't edit my post nor have doubled down on anything, men have had babies for at least a couple of decades now. Surprised that you are surprised by that, 21st century and all.

Woodsie1 · 19-07-2019 10:39pm

klaaaz wrote: »

I didn't edit my post nor have doubled down on anything, men have had babies for at least a couple of decades now. Surprised that you are surprised by that, 21st century and all.

No they quite simply havent.
Men have never had babies.They are not capable of having babies.

Monty Python were right all them years ago,seems klaaz you are struggling with reality!

Ted Johnson · 19-07-2019 10:39pm

klaaaz wrote: »

I didn't edit my post nor have doubled down on anything, men have had babies for at least a couple of decades now. Surprised that you are surprised by that, 21st century and all.

Typical man, stealing the credit from women

Jimbob1977 · 19-07-2019 10:41pm

It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words

1984

Sittingpretty · 19-07-2019 10:41pm

klaaaz wrote: »

I didn't edit my post nor have doubled down on anything, men have had babies for at least a couple of decades now. Surprised that you are surprised by that, 21st century and all.

Have they? Really? Can you link me one instance where a biological man has become
Pregnant and delivered a baby?

Ted Johnson · 19-07-2019 10:42pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Private individuals will be punished if they do t go along with it?

I work in the public sector and there are loads of official terms that we use. Not a problem for me.

I don't know who benefits. I would have said nobody is harmed either but the twisted knickers in reaction to it might cause some harm. Do you consider yourself harmed by the change?

I would consider it a dangerous precedent if your state employer can restrict you from using harmless words like manhole and pregnant woman in your place of work.

But hey, you go be a submissive bootlicker.

meeeeh · 19-07-2019 10:42pm

Is that Barkley's contribution to Trump re-election?

punisher5112 · 19-07-2019 10:43pm

lbc2019 wrote: »

You could call your grave a man hole!

Oh I do like that..... I'm going to have that and Philips hue lights with hue disco on loop going 24/7....

Sittingpretty · 19-07-2019 10:43pm

On second thoughts, don’t bother, it’s late and I’d rather be sleeping than pointing out the glaringly obvious.

punisher5112 · 19-07-2019 10:44pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ah so if women go down them too, then it makes perfect sense to change the name, right?

But do they ..

Only woman I seen going down was the one that fell down the open one.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:44pm

Ted Johnson wrote: »

No the opposition is to state compelling you to use pc language.

Has anyone found whee the state has said it will compel people to use the new terms? And sanction those who don't comply.

So far we've got an assumption that the state will adopt those terms in official business. Doesn't really merit the 1984 references, does it?

Faugheen · 19-07-2019 10:47pm

Another thread of people bitching and moaning about something that has absolutely zero impact on their lives.

Imagine whinging over a manhole not being called a manhole?

Get a grip ffs.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:47pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

But do they ..

Only woman I seen going down was the one that fell down the open one.

That doesn't answer the question though. If they were dubbed manhole because men went down them, wouldn't it be equally sensible to rename them if women also use them?

It's probably not a question of what you've personally seen though. Thinga probably happens without you seeing them.

meeeeh · 19-07-2019 10:47pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Has anyone found whee the state has said it will compel people to use the new terms? And sanction those who don't comply.

So far we've got an assumption that the state will adopt those terms in official business. Doesn't really merit the 1984 references, does it?

Ah come on, it smells of local inclusivity committee finding some work for themselves so nobody gets the idea they are not doing much. It might not be 1984 but it is bloody ridiculous.

klaaaz · 19-07-2019 10:49pm

Woodsie1 wrote: »

No they quite simply havent.
Men have never had babies.They are not capable of having babies.

Monty Python were right all them years ago,seems klaaz you are struggling with reality!

Yes, men have had babies since about 2008, a wonderful thing to happen for humankind. https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1005891/itv-this-morning-eamonn-holmes-ruth-langsford-pregnant-man-thomas-beatie

punisher5112 · 19-07-2019 10:50pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That doesn't answer the question though. If they were dubbed manhole because men went down them, wouldn't it be equally sensible to rename them if women also use them?

It's probably not a question of what you've personally seen though. Thinga probably happens without you seeing them.

Ok I'll fold... PLEASURE HOLE.... How's that sound ;-)

Ted Johnson · 19-07-2019 10:50pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Has anyone found whee the state has said it will compel people to use the new terms? And sanction those who don't comply.

So far we've got an assumption that the state will adopt those terms in official business. Doesn't really merit the 1984 references, does it?

If you work for Berkley city council you will be compelled to use the newspeak.

Honest question, how broken are you on the inside to have no problem with this?

punisher5112 · 19-07-2019 10:52pm

Oh my it fell down the pleasure hole....

Emergency services get back a few hours later after going through the LGBTQ plus a to z list and eventually figure it out....

The it is now well dead as they had sent and ice cream van 1st....

Ted Johnson · 19-07-2019 10:52pm

klaaaz wrote: »

Yes, men have had babies since about 2008, a wonderful thing to happen for humankind. https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1005891/itv-this-morning-eamonn-holmes-ruth-langsford-pregnant-man-thomas-beatie

That is grotesque.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:55pm

Ted Johnson wrote: »

I would consider it a dangerous precedent if your state employer can restrict you from using harmless words like manhole and pregnant woman in your place of work.

But hey, you go be a submissive bootlicker.

There are loads of accepted terms in my work. It wouldn't make sense to freestyle our own language because it creates ambiguity. Once a term is agreed upon, it's what we use because it leads to clear, effective communication. Bootlicking as you call it. Lol.

Can't for the life of me see why you would get so worked up about such a trivial issue. If someone can be injured by this, they'll probably spend half their life upset about one thing or another.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 19-07-2019 10:56pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Has anyone found whee the state has said it will compel people to use the new terms? And sanction those who don't comply.

So far we've got an assumption that the state will adopt those terms in official business. Doesn't really merit the 1984 references, does it?

Again... Bill C16 in Canada where the state COMPELLS you to use certain language. Prison terms for you if you don't use another persons preferred pro-nouns. Yes, prison terms.
This is your 1984.

Woodsie1 · 19-07-2019 10:56pm

klaaaz wrote: »

Yes, men have had babies since about 2008, a wonderful thing to happen for humankind. https://www.express.co.uk/showbiz/tv-radio/1005891/itv-this-morning-eamonn-holmes-ruth-langsford-pregnant-man-thomas-beatie

Thats a woman,men have no wombs.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 10:57pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Ok I'll fold... PLEASURE HOLE.... How's that sound ;-)

Sounds grand to me. Probably depends on how much pleasure you get from them. Not sure it will catch on.

klaaaz · 19-07-2019 11:00pm

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Thats a woman,men have no wombs.

That's a man who had the baby, all masculinity evident.

Woodsie1 · 19-07-2019 11:02pm

klaaaz wrote: »

That's a man who had the baby, all masculinity evident.

Its a woman,men dont have wombs.
Basic biology,surprised you dont know that men and women are different.

punisher5112 · 19-07-2019 11:02pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Sounds grand to me. Probably depends on how much pleasure you get from them. Not sure it will catch on.

Pleasure hole it is so....

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 19-07-2019 11:03pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Pleasure hole it is so....

Homer Simpson paved the way for us all when he called his garage his "Car Hole".

Credit where credit is due.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 11:04pm

Ted Johnson wrote: »

If you work for Berkley city council you will be compelled to use the newspeak.

Honest question, how broken are you on the inside to have no problem with this?

Newspeak. Lol. Still banging the 1984 drum. Sounds like you're really being victimised.

How broken an I? Honestly loaded question.

I just don't really worry about this kind of thing. I watch blokes get their knickers twisted til their pips squeek over this kind of thing.

Terms change all the time. I recently looked at a report we published a decade ago and there were loads of terms that were different. Nothing to worry about.

Bob24 · 19-07-2019 11:04pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Can't for the life of me see why you would get so worked up about such a trivial issue. If someone can be injured by this, they'll probably spend half their life upset about one thing or another.

If you think terminology is always a trivial matter which should never get anyone worked up, I assume you would agree that consequently there was no justification for this renaming exercice in the first place?

klaaaz · 19-07-2019 11:05pm

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Its a woman,men dont have wombs.
Basic biology,surprised you dont know that men and women are different.

That man has a womb and had the baby, of course men and women are different in some areas but that number is narrowing.

Woodsie1 · 19-07-2019 11:07pm

klaaaz wrote: »

That man has a womb and had the baby, of course men and women are different in some areas but that number is narrowing.

Men dont have wombs no matter how much you wish it.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 19-07-2019 11:07pm

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Newspeak. Lol. Still banging the 1984 drum. Sounds like you're really being victimised.

How broken an I? Honestly loaded question.

I just don't really worry about this kind of thing. I watch blokes get their knickers twisted til their pips squeek over this kind of thing.

Terms change all the time. I recently looked at a report we published a decade ago and there were loads of terms that were different. Nothing to worry about.

Yeah its all well and good until you call some woman who identifies as a man the wrong pronoun and you find yourself with no job or in prison. Google this for yourself and see what's happening in Canada.
Yeah sure, language changes, you don't hear the word "N****R" or "F****T" much these days and for good reason. We're talking about manholes here...manholes.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 11:07pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

Pleasure hole it is so....

OK. I won't be getting upset like other posters.
You seem to have come around to the idea of changing the name. Good for you

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 19-07-2019 11:10pm

klaaaz wrote: »

That man has a womb and had the baby, of course men and women are different in some areas but that number is narrowing.

You're monumentally stupid.

El_Duderino 09 · 19-07-2019 11:11pm

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Again... Bill C16 in Canada where the state COMPELLS you to use certain language. Prison terms for you if you don't use another persons preferred pro-nouns. Yes, prison terms.
This is your 1984.

Canada is going to prosecute people in the US? And Is Peterson in prison?

Crikey this is more serious than I was giving credit for. Unless you're taking a single piece of legislation from Canada and applying it to another country. Then you're just going out of your way to create a Conspiracy theory. Which is it?

klaaaz · 19-07-2019 11:13pm

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Men dont have wombs no matter how much you wish it.

Yes some men do have wombs, that has been proven no need for any wishes.

Hunky Monster wrote: »

You're monumentally stupid.

Poor you stuck in the era of yesteryear, has the wonders of the modern world like electricity reached you yet?

Manholes are gender neutral now

Comments