Leilin

... because things were dandy in 1910, before all of those. Nobody died in the streets, there wasn't mass death in the poor classes due to disease or flat-out starvation. There was no racism or sexism on paper in state laws. Children weren't working literally to death in factories. Black people could sit on the front of busses without being arrested, and companies NEVER abused the environment because the invisible hand would have prevented them from committing those abuses, right? Again, my usual response to your ignorant, fact-allergic derp: *Facepalm*

I concur with Betty. Wikis only really work when the community has a consistent lexicon going on. We definitely do not.

Didn't we have almost this same exact conversation BEFORE he went on the show?

That's adorable, and if you get your own TV show, it should be called that.

Actually, it means exactly that (with certain prespecified limits). What it isn't is freedom from the consequences of your speech. Saying the freedom of speech, those exact words, in the constitution is specifically for political speech or patents is a mightily broad reading, since the text in the document itself is unqualified. And, of course, the Supreme Court disagrees with your statement 100 percent of the time. http://en.wikipedia....n_v._California Jacket covered with profanity. Not political. http://en.wikipedia....School_District Free speech in school. Not political (Note: This is the source of the tinker test, which found that students actually DO NOT have a right to free speech if the speech is on, directed at, or directed from school property) http://en.wikipedia....ucation_v._Pico Books in school libraries. Not political. http://en.wikipedia....._403_v._Fraser http://en.wikipedia....ity_of_Virginia Religious speech. http://en.wikipedia....Liberties_Union Obscenity. Not political. There are dozens more. The exclusion of free speech to politics and patent violates a couple hundred years of precedent. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of speech. Just like you have the freedom to callously disregard HER wishes to be represented as she pleases.

No. Sissies are not necessarily (or even, in my experience, often) transgender people, which Riley (and myself) are. Sissiness when not a girl and not associated with transgender is more akin to fetishistic transvestism.

Was it ever readily available on their site?

One of the first things one should learn before discussing science, history, and literature: Not all opinions are created equal.

I've seen sensible and well-founded rationalizations and historical findings to imply both a Germanic and Romantic root. It is, it seems, significantly easier to tell what the root isn't rather than what it is. Deductive reasoning is fun like that. Stop parroting silly falsehoods and I will gladly stop correcting them.

What logic? You have yet to use any sort of logic in this thread. Perhaps you have that confused with whimsy and sophistry, both of which you have exhibited in spades. They might be invisible pink unicorns or just unphotographable! You can't prove 100%! My English teacher told me you have pink unicorns on your head! (See how stupid this sounds?)

You are arguing a point with no factual backing behind it and saying it could happen based on a meme. See the pink unicorn statement in the preceding post.

Yes. There's just no actual evidence for it and plenty of evidence against it going back, oh, 800 years. You know what? I've decided there are pink unicorns on your head, and you can't definitively prove otherwise!

Uh.. What? Primary Sources are NEVER, EVER definitive proof because they are prone to statements of bias. Did your history teacher tell you that one too?

Just in case you were still persisting on this mental folly. http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/fuck?q=fuck Oxford English Dictionary, one of the leading resources in the world on etymology. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuck Wiki. I'm sure you'll complain about Wiki's unreliability, rather than actually noting the useful citations.

You are using the exact same rationalization that the birthers use. Stop and think about that for a minute.

I'm fine disagreeing with you, but don't expect to post utter falsehoods unchallenged, because we will challenge them. Your statement was demonstably false and the fact that you are sticking with it is nothing more than you plugging your ears and refusing to recognize the facts of the situation.

Also, if you're still complaining about the reliability of the Snopes link, you didn't fully read the page. You should also know that the old ".coms are inreliable" tripe went the way of the Dodo in the realm of factual statements the moment that it became public knowledge that anybody who wants to can have a .org site, for the most part. PETA has a .org, as an example. Every website is only as strong as its citations and, guess what? Snopes's are impeccable. Furthermore, that is not how burden of proof works. When there is NO reliable evidence for an argument, and ample evidence AGAINST that argument (as is the case with the acronym statement), then that argument is false until a burden of proof, which can be satisfied with reliable evidence, is fulfilled, and, again, as has been provided in this very thread, there is actually definitive proof and knowledge that such is not the case.

It's definitely not possible. Sorry. Also: Thank you for perfectly demonstrating argumentum ad hominem, rather than actually reading the link. The origin of the word in question is certainly NOT lost to history, which is what makes the proliferation of that silly myth that much more nonsensical.

Write-in!

What kind of campaign are you running here?! Be proud! Sarah 2012!!

Um... what? Uh. What exactly are you referring to here? Did you mean college classmates? Perhaps you should stop going to Donald Trump for your "news" and "facts." FERPA. All of EVERYBODY'S school records are sealed. You could go on, and considering your previously loose attachment to what those of us who live in the real world call "facts," I recommend it! It would be hilarious!

Then your history teacher is wrong. Take a look at the earlier posts in this thread. I'll relink the snopes article for you: http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/fuck.asp

That one's an urban myth, I'm afraid. The population was too overly illiterate at the time to have come up with a term based on acronym, doubly so because a lot of those terms didn't find use in English until after that era.

The cut of the diaper is smaller around in general (same thickness) http://bambinodiapers.com/news/2011/10/medium-diaper-sizing-update/