Yeah, turns out it’s kinda hard to dodge the draft for a war you hate when all the countries that allegedly oppose it closed their borders to you.

Doubly insane when the first mention of what’s thought to be the Palestinians was by Ramesses III, 3199 years ago.

The hilarious new sequel - in theatres now.

Back when Russia invaded Ukraine, they issued a statement about how they’re saddened that Europe has descended into violence and are calling for the region to give peace a chance. It was a solid troll.

On the bright side, it’s gonna be so funny

Same with Mazovism, it incentivizes you to act like a jackass for very little payoff. It’s great design.

The purple people eater got them all, sadly.

More like Benjamin Lay.

You’re missing the analogy of it being a defence mechanism in cases of abuse in children. Just cleaning the child up will not fix the issue.

Is it still “First Lady” if the marriage is morganatic?

The reality is precisely the opposite.

The weird thing about Putin’s Russia is that it has no oligarchs, really. Specifically, the idea is that an oligarch is someone who’s wealth allows them access to political power, while in Russia, it’s the other way around - political position allows people access to wealth. Conversely, when they fall out of favour, their money doesn’t protect them - it simply goes away.

The USA, on the other hand, has plenty of oligarchs, and thinking they’re taking sides in politics because they fear Trump is idiocy. These are the people buying islands and building doomsday bunkers in New Zealand. These are the people who shoot themselves to space and copy haircuts of Roman emperors. They’re picking sides because Matt Christmann was right.

Through Beijing, in fact.

True.

This, but from the acoustic session.

put whole onions into an oven set to 180° to 200° F.

Wait, would that work?

Fair point. My point would be that English doesn’t really inflect words at all, but when it does, namely pronouns, it has both cases and genders.

For comparison, in German, cases don’t change nouns either (except some genitives - kinda like English, now that i think about it), they instead affect articles, and even then the nominative and accusative case are identical, except for masculine singular nouns, and first and second person pronouns. So, if n. and f. nouns dominate, you could make the case that German doesn’t have an acc. case, and then make a carveout for m. noun “outliers”. Except step into first and second person, and acc. pops back out, meaning it was always there, even for f. and n.

“Some feminitives” is disingenuous. It’s an Indo-European language, it shares the structure of other IE languages, in some cases pared down and/or in disuse, but they’re still there, same as vestigial base-12 counting.

I don’t get why people are so upset about the concept of grammatical gender, though. It’s gramatical, it’s not actual gender - original division in PIE was “animate” and “inanimate”. Hell, I vaguely remember a conlang that had separate genders for terrestrial and aquatic animals, so you could absolutely make one that has a gender for “wolf”.

Well, uh, yes. The thread OP notes greek (as in bible) uses generic masculine forms for plural. Modern English takes that tack much more broadly, using the theoretically masculine term for everything. And you can tell it’s masculine, not neuter, because, eg. a steward (of Gondor) is a steward, but a (-n air) stewardess is now a flight attendant.

Being immediately identifiable isn’t the standard, for example in languages that don’t use the definite article (Slavic languages, for example) the first noun wouldn’t necessarily exhibit it’s grammatical gender, but it wouldn’t mean it doesn’t have one. Also, the brackets you used get parsed by boost as html tags.

The very existence of gendered nouns and pronouns means English has gender. It’s just less noticeable because unlike the German “-innen” approach, English typically shoves most things into neuter and mostly defaults to male for persons and then hides it behind “he or she” or a singular “they”. You can argue it’s archaic or vestigial, and I’d agree, but it is there. Same how nouns don’t exhibit cases, but pronouns do. Compare:

“The man stood there, the man’s hand on the coffee cup, the cup warming the man”.

“He stood there, his hand on the coffee cup, the cup warming him.”

English absolutely has grammatical gender, it just defaults to “male” so much people forget there’s other options. For example, “teacheress” is a real word, it’s just so archaic that the male word now means both, same with how “you” is both singular and plural.