mike carey

I can't imagine how!

Or indeed, to meet gentlemen of a certain age when a reversal of those roles is contemplated.

Moderator's Note For those that were not aware, and a reminder to those who were, that when we lock a thread discussion of the topic is closed and won't be resumed in another thread. Accordingly I'm locking this thread. Thank you all for your cooperation. Mike

It was theatre. Satirising homophobic tropes. Trolling. Pure and simple.

Umm, was it not clear that the question was a joke prompted by the use of the word for a female massage therapist, and not asking a serious question about their gender identity?

You only had to ask!

Thanks for that info. If I'm reading their articles on line, I prefer to use a larger screen than my phone. But worth knowing about the app.

You don't give up, do you. You can spout wild generalities to advance your various arguments, and some retrospective analysis here of what had been suspected (strongly suspected in some cases I accept) but later confirmed as having been accurate suspicions. You are entitled to, and do cite Expert Witness A to support your case. You are not entitled to demand, as you regularly do, that those who disagree tick every box in a list of criteria that you deem necessary for them to make their case, nor to demand that others produce a list of their own of who said what and when. The review of the incident time line, which the US and Canadian authorities will undertake when not under the pressure that a critical incident generates, will determine what could have, or should have (not the same thing) been understood from the available data. Sometimes there is confusion in the heat of the moment, sometimes through lack of information, at other times through timidity in interpreting the information at hand. But for you, it's always evidence of some grand political conspiracy, and you don't hesitate to assert here that that is the case.

@Simon Suraci is an active, and insightful participant in the forum, and you would do well to search for his content in here. It may take you some time to read it all, but it would not be time wasted. IIRC he is moving to the city of Saint James. That is, San Diego. I make no comment as to whether I would go there on account of his being there.

Indeed, it's reported that they did, and also that there were assessments in certain circles as to whether that meant that the submersible was lost. There was still doubt about whether that was conclusive. Many Monday morning quarterbacks say that it was.

In case it wasn't obvious, attributing political motives to how the Canadian and US authorities handled the situation is political and therefore outside the scope of discussion in the Lounge.

A reminder to stay on topic. We've deleted some posts but left others that make relevant points and also include off-topic points. Don't reply to them unless what you are saying is in response to one of the relevant points.

Gentlemen, enough of the personal sniping. You know the drill!

I'd say more than 'a bit extreme', rather that the conspiracy theory is a calculated and wilful misrepresentation of the information. The navy detected an acoustic signal consistent with the implosion but had no way to be definitive as to what it was or what it meant. People may recall that during the search, regular tapping sounds were detected at one stage, and there was speculation that it came from the submersible. It turned out that the speculation as to what those acoustic signals meant was wrong. It's entirely understandable that there was no public announcement and speculation of that earlier acoustic signal. That doesn't a conspiracy make. There's a military maxim that first reports are always wrong.

Moderator's note to stay on topic, we'll remove commentary that's not about the incident itself or the responses to it.

Bon anniversaire!

There was a report on ABC radio's The Law Report about a case in New York (?) where a lawyer had asked ChatGPT for information on cases similar to his action against an airline claiming negligence after his client was injured by being hit my a service trolley. It did, and came up with a variety of cases as precedent, involving several airlines in different jurisdictions. The lawyer presented the brief to the court. Turned out the AI had made up the cases. It knew what a judgment looked like and just fabricated the data in that format. The judge wasn't aware of the cases (surprisingly!) and checked. He then took two hours to take the offending lawyer, who may now lose his licence, to task.

The issue had been discussed in this thread:

Masseur is one of those job titles in English which don't have -man as a suffix, that are taken to include both genders. Some of those have a female variant that is used to make a distinction when that is needed. Think actress, aviatrix and dominatrix. (There are examples where there is no female form, perhaps because linguistically speaking it was inconceivable for a woman to do that job. Think doctor. When women started working in the field no need was seen for a special word.) Masseuse is perhaps an outlier in that use of the female variant is bleeding across to male practitioners. It will be interesting linguistically to see if this incorrect usage becomes normalised, as often happens as the meaning of words shifts to what a proportion of native speakers think they mean, or if the gender distinction holds.

My guess is that people misunderstand when others say 'masseurs' and assume it is singular.

Agree on JFK's Soho Lounge. Got to use it on my way to Orlando.

Have the happiest of happy birthdays Westie. Twenty-nine and some months!

I wouldn't dream of suggesting that your inability to understand that 'in some cases' means that by definition 'in some other cases' it was not a perception but the reality, was due to far more lax marijuana laws in the People's Republic of California Norte than anywhere in this Commonwealth. I didn't mention the signatories of the US declaration of independence for the obvious reason that my point did not apply to them. And I don't post puerile images in an attempt to belittle other people.

And the late great Dame Glenda Jackson played King Lear on the NY stage a couple of years ago. Shock horror. Not that actors were all the gender of the character portrayed at the Globe in the 17th century (they were all male), so for her to play Lear seems only to be fair. Some roles transcend the gender and race that they are perceived to be, and in some of those cases it's only a current perception that they were, say Caucasian. To be sure, some recent historical figures don't lend themselves to race changes, but who is to say that a first nations actor couldn't portray Dr King if the intent was to highlight his message of inclusion? I can't help but recall recent controversy over a black actor portraying a mermaid, as if real mermaids were all white.