On Wed, 03 Jul 2013 06:34:12 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

> On Mon, 01 Jul 2013 18:15:16 -0400, Cheryl >
> wrote:
>
> >On 7/1/2013 5:41 PM, Jeßus wrote:
> >> On Mon, 1 Jul 2013 22:17:23 +0100, Janet > wrote:
> >>
> >>> In article >, ost
> >>> says...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2013 18:33:23 +0100, Janet wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> In article >, ost
> >>>>> says...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, 01 Jul 2013 07:35:03 -0700, sf wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I had to hear about this from a real live person!
> >>>>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-U-S-show.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I give up. What is a lazy "t*****"?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> tosser.
> >>>>
> >>>> Ugh. I knew it had to be a UK'ism of some sort but I just couldn't
> >>>> place the word. Thanks :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Is it that derogatory that it needs to be asterisked?
> >>>
> >>> I'm surprised it was. Calling someone a tosser is the equivalent of an
> >>> American calling someone a jerk and I've never seen jerk asterisked
> >>> either.
> >>
> >> Tosser actually means ******, whether that needs censoring with
> >> asterisks I'm not so sure.
> >>
> >I was wondering about ******. Does that need asterisks?
>
> Not in my opinion.

Words don't hurt unless the listener values what the shit slinger has
to say.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.