On 2017-09-13 00:32, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Sep 2017 02:16 am, Larry Martell wrote:
>> Not too many females here, but anyway:
> Was expecting a dress in a snake-skin pattern.
> Was pleasantly surprised to see Insertion Sort in Python on a dress!
>> (And if any guys want to wear this, there's nothing wrong with that.)
> Assuming they can fit in the offered sizes :-)
> Here in Australia, we're having an expensive, divisive, non-binding exercise in
> political propaganda, a postal survey on whether or not to continue allowing
> discrimination in marriage. The pro-discrimination side has run a TV
> advertisement claiming that equal rights for marriage is just the first step
> that will end with our sons being told they can wear dresses to school (and
> possibly even lions and lambs lying down together in the field).
Co-incidentally, there was a story in the news today about a couple in
the UK who have stopped sending their son to a school that's allowing
another child to dress as both a boy and a girl. They did the same thing
with their eldest son at the same school two years ago.
> Apparently that's meant to be the end of the world as we know it, or something.
> The amusing thing to my mind is that the pro-discrimination, anti-equality
> faction also tend to be the most conservative pro-monarchy faction. I don't
> recall seeing them go into paroxysms of gender confusion when Prince Charles,
> Duke of Edinburgh, appears in public wearing a kilt.
You do know that Prince Charles is the Prince of Wales and that the Duke
of Edinburgh is his father, don't you? :-)
>  Gosh, that's a shocker. Bet you didn't see that coming.