Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: RoadKingLarry on December 14, 2016, 06:05:56 AM

Title: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: RoadKingLarry on December 14, 2016, 06:05:56 AM
Shocking?

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2115987-viruses-may-have-evolved-to-hit-men-hard-but-go-easy-on-women/ (https://www.newscientist.com/article/2115987-viruses-may-have-evolved-to-hit-men-hard-but-go-easy-on-women/)
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: Fly320s on December 14, 2016, 06:31:33 AM
Even viruses are sexist! 
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: makattak on December 14, 2016, 09:07:55 AM
I've been discussing that with my wife. Another theory is that estrogen also boosts the ability to resist and fight off disease. (I can't find the article so this is just my recollection.)

So, it's possible both are the case- women are harder to infect, so the viri develop the means to better infect males than females, because the males are getting infected more often and the viri multiply in men instead of women.  

(*Note: dictionary says "viruses" but it's LATIN, dang it!)
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: TommyGunn on December 14, 2016, 10:50:40 AM
Actually the plural of virus is Virii, not viri.   [tinfoil]
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: makattak on December 14, 2016, 11:38:48 AM
Actually the plural of virus is Virii, not viri.   [tinfoil]

Turns out, in Latin, they never used virus as a plural, since it meant slimy liquid or poison (venom).

So, it appears to be a debate as to what the plural would be.

Virii is acceptable, too, then. (But not "Viruses". Stinking cultural grammatical appropriation colonization!)
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: lupinus on December 14, 2016, 11:49:23 AM
But this isn't Latin. This is English. And English follows other languages down dark roads and bludgeons them, picks their pockets, and takes what it likes and mutilates it to its whims.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: roo_ster on December 14, 2016, 11:51:02 AM
But this isn't Latin. This is English. And English follows other languages down dark roads and bludgeons them, picks their pockets, and takes what it likes and mutilates it to its whims.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thus, viruses.
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: makattak on December 14, 2016, 11:53:40 AM
Thus, viruses.

NEVAH! Viri or virii.  :P (Additionally, I'm quite proud of the tangent I've caused.)
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: MechAg94 on December 14, 2016, 12:14:36 PM
But this isn't Latin. This is English. And English follows other languages down dark roads and bludgeons them, picks their pockets, and takes what it likes and mutilates it to its whims.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Or Modern English where you can add the "invent a new word or slang" option.
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: 230RN on December 15, 2016, 04:53:11 AM
I'm wondering if it isn't caused by the fact that men are out and about amongst a wider range of people more than women.  You know, hunting and gathering as opposed to kitchening and bedrooming.  Sorta kinda.  
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: LadySmith on December 15, 2016, 06:06:22 AM
You know, hunting and gathering as opposed to kitchening and bedrooming.

Am I gonna have to start throwing shoes up in here?!?

 :mad:
 :lol:
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: 230RN on December 20, 2016, 06:18:10 AM
^, =D

Oh, feh.  Just a whimsical way of putting the fact that women in general do more stuff at home than men as a possible explanation of the problem.  In general.  

Yes, that "traditional" way of life is changing.,

Tsk-tsk... "throwing shoes."  Violence never solves anything, they say.
 
But I'm sorry if that phrase was offensive to you.   I'm retreating to my safe space now to repent.  Or, con permiso, I can just go stand in the corner for fifteen minutes. That was a pretty stiff punishment for a 10 year old boy, but it beat getting hit with Mom's  shoe.

And it's even worse for a 78 year old boy.

Terry
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: lupinus on December 20, 2016, 08:26:36 AM
Or Modern English where you can add the "invent a new word or slang" option.
Or when you can decide you need a new word, and instead of making up a new one you can go back to the latin/greek/etc dictionary and grab one we hadn't already stolen. Then you can keep it, mutilate it, or hell mash it together (bonus points for mashing together a Latin AND Greek root for your new word) and declare it now part of Enlightened English.
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: bedlamite on December 20, 2016, 11:50:34 AM
Or when you can decide you need a new word, and instead of making up a new one you can go back to the latin/greek/etc dictionary and grab one we hadn't already stolen. Then you can keep it, mutilate it, or hell mash it together (bonus points for mashing together a Latin AND Greek root for your new word) and declare it now part of Enlightened English cromulent.

FTFY.
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: 230RN on December 20, 2016, 11:02:41 PM
Or when you can decide you need a new word, and instead of making up a new one you can go back to the latin/greek/etc dictionary and grab one we hadn't already stolen. Then you can keep it, mutilate it, or hell mash it together (bonus points for mashing together a Latin AND Greek root for your new word) and declare it now part of Enlightened English.

Or quadruple negatives.  Like "disunirregardless," which I am fond of using in impolite society.  

I say it ought to be cromulated formalaciously.
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: makattak on December 21, 2016, 08:33:23 AM
Or quadruple negatives.  Like "disunirregardless," which I am fond of using in impolite society. 

I say it ought to be cromulated formalaciously.

I love how you've embiggened your vocabulary.
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: freakazoid on December 21, 2016, 07:03:17 PM
(https://namanknowledge.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/simpsons.gif)
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: MechAg94 on December 21, 2016, 10:04:34 PM
So do you think it is because in the past men were more likely to travel further from the home?  The virus would be more likely to spread.
Title: Re: Women and minorities hardest hit.
Post by: 230RN on December 24, 2016, 04:13:24 AM
So do you think it is because in the past men were more likely to travel further from the home?  The virus would be more likely to spread.

You askin' me?  If so, yes.  I think that, and wider contacts in the outside world, are very important and obvious variables to consider.  I don't know why you specified "in the past."  It goes on today.

Consider the so-called "airliner disease." Consider also the packed commuter trains in, e.g. New York City*.  Consider the hand-shaking that goes on in business transactions.  All of this is outside the family circle of friends and more likely to occur with men than women.

I ain't no epidemiologist, but that kind of stuff sure seems obvious to me as substantial variables.

Terry

* I rode the subways in NYC for many years for school and jobs.  Most people cannot imagine the "packing" of people in rush hour.  I tell you true, no exaggerations, it's hard to move your arms in that kind of press.  Reading a newspaper requires special techniques to turn the pages, and there's a special way to fold and hold the paper in that kind of situation.  It is said that the smaller tabloid format of newspapers, like the NY Daily News, was a result of this.  Full-sized papers like the New York Times required a special four-fold technique such that it took up only about six inches horizontally.  And that tickling on your ass could be a pervert or just a corner of that lady's purse as the train swayed.  No 'sta chite, mon.