God’s to-do list,
*edit as per wishes from Nan
- Make man. *If things don’t work out as planned remove one of his ribs and make a woman.
- Give them free will.
- Slaughter 99.9% of them for using it.
- Randomly favour one group.
- Never speak or write a single word.
- Legalize slavery and ban shrimp.
- Kill Myself for a weekend.
- Hide.
A Tale Unfolds 
That sounds about right.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like this ark. Certainly not because I agree- but I’m guessing i can draft a rather good opposite viewpoint.
Be sure to then tell me why you would find it unsettling.
LikeLike
@ColonicFireworks:
Well, go on, bigmouth. Hit us with your best shot.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Not really TNT Chris, but I did write a post re. the points made by ark- should be a link below- give me your best gripe.
LikeLike
Get the atmosphere completely wrong… twice… then make man.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That sums it up. We’re done here.
I see that crap still floats… (CS)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m fine with the slavery bit, but, man, oh, man did the bastard HAVE to ban shrimp?! JEEEESUS H. Christ! That is just TOO much!
LikeLiked by 1 person
4. Randomly favour one group.
Think of it in terms of football where you continue to root for your home team even if they suck year after year.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I don’t have that problem, fortunately! Prof Taboo on the other hand ….
LikeLike
Humph! Chauvinist! Make HUMANS!
Male and female created he them … KJV, Genesis 5:2
LikeLiked by 1 person
Point taken. Will amend.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Done. See point 1.
LikeLike
Clever.
LikeLike
Man = humanity as a whole, irrespective of sex — i.e., mankind.
Originally the sexes were distinguished by wer (male) and wif (female) but the former dropped out of usage and the second changed to mean married female. Now man means both the singular (adult male) and plural (all of mankind), while woman means female man.
man
woman
LikeLike
Gender neutral/inclusive language is, in the main, preferable.
LikeLike
Aside from the fact that the word “man” is already neutral/incluisive — by definition –why is this type of language deemed preferable? And by whom?
LikeLike
Because …. no, dammit, I simply can’t be bothered.
Argue with Nan when she shows up.
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 2 people
This is why I refer to everyone I meet as an “idjit”. You can’t get more gender neutral, and correct, than that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
DUCK!
LikeLiked by 1 person
A duck is a species of waterfowl. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
GOOSE!
LikeLiked by 1 person
How “man” was later defined has nothing to do with my point.
Unless I was mistaken, Ark was (tongue-in-cheek) referencing the “biblical” sequence of events, so I referenced the bible verse noted in my comment.
However, since he was merely a human male attempting to do this from a god’s POV, I suppose all bets are off.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Okay. but the full verse in Genesis 5:2 (KJV) reads:
“Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.”
The Hebrew word adam literally means man, mankind, human being, and I assumed (perhaps incorrectly since he’s now changed it) that Ark was employing this definition rather than the male-centric singular one.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H120&t=KJV
LikeLike
You seem to be a bit obsessive-compulsive about “correctness.” Did you overlook, ignore, or simply miss the fact that I was needling Ark?
LikeLiked by 1 person
In that case, I guess it was the last. Wouldn’t be the first time that’s happened. And probably not the last time, either. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
In between making man and drowning them, there are visits for bbq
LikeLiked by 2 people