Ah yes. The obligatory, "I can't believe that person said that" in response to someone who actually stands up and bluntly states the truth of the matter. God forbid someone bring up the obvious in that there's a distinct limit to how many minority concerns the average person can bring themselves to care about. And this is without getting into the painfully obvious facts where the minority is basically militant and demanding "feel-good" changes to terminology that's 100% accurate in its current form.
I actually have a problem when people start trying to change accurate biological terminology because it makes some remarkably small portion of society feel uncomfortable. Case in point on where this rabbit hole eventually goes:
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/197...cumentary-on-people-who-think-theyre-animals/
People who think they're animals are in fact a smaller minority than people who think they're a gender that they're not. Yet, it wouldn't surprise me if at some point down the line we hit a scenario in where the introductory greeting of, "Ladies and Gentlemen" becomes painted as some sort of privileged phrase used by those lucky fortunate people who identify themselves as human beings. Guess what? Just because you think you're a god damn tiger doesn't mean you're a tiger. You're still a human being.
I have no problems with people doing whatever they want with themselves or identifying however they feel like. I do however have a problem when extreme minority groups act like they have a right to take offense at conventional terminology because it doesn't pander specifically to them. The term "Ladies and Gentlemen" is an acceptable term for general use because 99.99% of people identify as human beings (and in fact, they are human beings). The term "boys have penises, girls have vaginas" is an acceptable term for general use because it's biologically accurate for 100% of people.
