Reg Boyle wrote:
> Tako I assume it is seen as provocative to challenge the side-lining
> of the word GAY, by both those who have claimed it.... the homosexual
> community...and those who have lost its sentiment,.... the non-homosexual
> others. Like it or not, this is a very provocative subject, however, it was
> simply another example of how a minority can corral a word which
> rightly belongs to the majority. The word tenor being the one I defend.
Yes, like you can't say "gay" in school now without people assuming you
mean homosexual and giggling (crikey, my _9-year-olds_ did that a couple
of days ago!), and you are telling me that any minute now you won't be
able to say "tenor" any more and mean what it used to?
"Well, there goes ol' Reg. D'you know that, behind closed doors" (drops
voice to an almost inaudible whisper) "he's really one of those" (mouths
word only) "tenors?" "Noooo?! Who'd have thought it? He looks so - well,
so _normal_"
I've been married to a tenor. It will out, you know. They can't help it.
>"One must have loved a woman of genius to comprehend the happiness of loving a
fool."
Blush. Curtsey. You're too kind.
Cheers, Reg. :o)
Linda
|
|  |
