Guys, remember my response to Little Girl Lover down below in the thread I started about the two new articles on Salon.com, specifically the one dealing with the 10th Edition of the Merriam-Webster dictionary being banned from certain elementary and middle schools because it has an entry for "oral sex," and I queried about whether that edition of the dictionary had the word "dildo" in it?
Well, overwhelmed by curiosity, I just checked the online version of Merriam-Webster, and it does indeed have an entry for the word "dildo"! I kid you not, it's see for yourself ⚠️ ↗!
Oh, the horror! The various "child advocacy" and anti orgs (is there any difference?) that police the Web for "inappropriate" content that may be "harmful to minors" need to get Merriam-Webster's online dictionary knocked off the Web! It's corrupting the minds of young girls with some of its entries! How can any decent people tolerate this!? Suppose some tween girls come across that word while perusing Merriam-Webster while doing their homework and learn about dildos!? What if they get "sexualized" as a result??!! What if they actually use some of their allowance or school lunch money to purchase an actual dildo, or make one themselves, and they actually use it on themselves?! And worse, what if they actually receive sexual pleasure, or maybe even an orgasm, from their use of the dildo?! They are too young to experience sexual pleasure! They will be traumatized even if they are totally unaware of it!! They will become a victim of themselves, and that awful Merriam-Webster will be to blame!
We, as concerned citizens for the sexual suppression of...er, the welfare of young girls need to stand up and boycott Merriam-Webster's online site! We need to make parents aware of this! We need better parental control software! We need stronger government regulation of the Internet! Geezus christ fuck, we need a whole damn police state! Where the hell is Oprah Winfrey and John Walsh when we need them!!??
And geez, I had no idea that the word "dildo" goes all the way back to at least 1598. I guess young girls were in danger of pleasuring themselves with dildos all the way back then, too.
GirlChat #490957
OMFG!! Merriam-Webster online must be banned!
Posted by Dissident on 2010-January-27 13:21:24 EST, Wednesday
Views: 0 Likes: 0
This post is archived, preventing any new replies.
Responses
- Re: OMFG!! Merriam-Webster online must be banned! - Bottle on 2010-January-30 14:41:15 EST, Saturday - (0 / 0 / 0)
- Re: OMFG!! Merriam-Webster online must be banned! - Little Girl Lover on 2010-January-28 06:50:02 EST, Thursday - (0 / 0 / 0)
- Re: OMFG!! Merriam-Webster online must be banned! - Shaper of Worlds on 2010-January-27 15:20:15 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 1)
- Re: OMFG!! Merriam-Webster online must be banned! - CatcherintheRye on 2010-January-27 16:35:02 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 0)
- Said by a little girl - kind of GM - griffith on 2010-January-27 13:51:55 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 6)
- btw, your sig pic is very nice - griffith on 2010-January-27 19:53:48 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 2)
- Thanks, Griffith. I'm happy about the sigpic NT. - bottle on 2010-January-28 20:08:03 EST, Thursday - (0 / 0 / 0)
- Sorry, the message above was for Bottle nt - griffith on 2010-January-27 19:55:20 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 0)
- Hehe. LOL! - bottle on 2010-January-27 19:20:53 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 0)
- lol! :) - CatcherintheRye on 2010-January-27 16:32:45 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 1)
- Re: lol! :) - griffith on 2010-January-27 17:09:51 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 0)
- btw, your sig pic is very nice - griffith on 2010-January-27 19:53:48 EST, Wednesday - (0 / 0 / 2)