Peter-Lucas wrote:
> Joseph Littleshoes wrote:
>
>
>>The mere fact that 2 such obviously male contributors would be
>
> referred
>
>>to (collectively or singularly) as "bitch" tell me more about the
>>author of the usage than i really care to know
>
>
>
> Oh *really*????
>
> One only has to do a quick Google on "Omnitheistic Church".
>
> It seems, your "church" has it's own publishing company.... the
> Omnitheistic Church Press.
>
> " We are a small publishing house, founded in 1993, owned and operated
> by The Omnitheistic Church, dedicated to publishing items of interest to
> *** Males who want to know more about the occult, Paganism, and erotic
> spirituality."

So what is australia like iran in your mind? no queers in oz? or do we
fall back on the explanation that the male who would even attempt to use
such an accusation against another is merely demonstrating their own
latency? That natural part of themselves they hate vehemently? its
generally the case.

Besides, out side of the '***' community, how many men refer to other
men as a "bitch"? Ok, outside of the *** men's community and a penal
colony

>
>
>
>>And of course if that usage is typical of Australian males
>>well.....what's the old saying "a handsome face is the best disguise
>
> for
>
>>a treacherous heart"? that Peter Lucas does have some remarkable
>>physiognomy, at least facialy, which is, apparently & unfortunately,
>
> as
>
>>facile as it is facial.
>>--
>
>
>
> You *do* suffer from verbal diarrhoea, don't you?
>
>
Surly its no more offensive than your textural bulimia?
--
JL