winjim
Welcome yourself into the new modern crisis
😄
No it's not, but nice try!
I searched for 'women' on the Sainsbury's website and I got 193 toiletries, 79 medicines, one magazine and a 'small appliance'.
😄
No it's not, but nice try!
I searched for 'women' on the Sainsbury's website and I got 193 toiletries, 79 medicines, one magazine and a 'small appliance'.
Do you have enough reward points to buy one though?I searched for 'women' on the Sainsbury's website
Have a look at Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben to see how those sort of brand images can be problematicDo you have enough reward points to buy one though?
Actually I was thinking more like this:
https://www.sainsburys.co.uk/gol-ui/product/mrs-elswood-haimisha-cucumbers-670g
But I don't think they are female figures, merely a female brand. So not quite there yet ...
Objection! The term “human” also contains the gendered term man.
Mildly interesting factoid: before the word ‘man’ came to be used for male adults it simply meant adult human being, either male or female.
Mildly interesting factoid: before the word ‘man’ came to be used for male adults it simply meant adult human being, either male or female.
Person contains the gendered term son. That is not acceptable in a tolerant, diverse society; make sure you don't use it again and replace it with a neutral term like human ...
Effectively, it still does, in words like “mankind”, Doesn’t it?
But, my comment was joking.
Mildly interesting factoid: before the word ‘man’ came to be used for male adults it simply meant adult human being, either male or female.
As normal, f**k all to say but use a Hundred words doing it.
But even if it were taken to mean that once upon a time, it would have been in a time well before females were ever regarded as fully equal adult human beings, or treated as such, so the 'supposed' gender neutrality of the language wouldn't really translate to any useful neutrality in life..
I think I need to go for a run ....