Are the "Sexers" Next?

Post Reply
User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45349
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Are the "Sexers" Next?

#1

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:51 am

Since the third person personal pronoun references to POTUS in the Constitution are all in the masculine, I anticipate we'll have a new class of challengers. While "sex" these days has been devolved into "gender" (since "sex" is apparently seen more and more to be a verb), calling these loons "genderers" is a bit unwieldy. So I think we should call them "sexers." (In fact, that is a legitimate word and is used to describe people who determine the sex gender of Foggy's fowlish offspring after they hatch.)

Who will be the first "sexer"? And will he or she rely on Minor v. Happersett? After all, if a woman couldn't vote even though she was a natural born citizen, how could she run for an office she could not vote for?

Is Mario Apuzzo up for the bloviation? Or will it be our favorite proponent of the "sacred sperm"?



User avatar
realist
Posts: 34982
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:33 pm

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#2

Post by realist » Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:53 am

Sterngard Friegen wrote:Since the third person personal pronoun references to POTUS in the Constitution are all in the masculine, I anticipate we'll have a new class of challengers. While "sex" these days has been devolved into "gender" (since "sex" is apparently seen more and more to be a verb), calling these loons "genderers" is a bit unwieldy. So I think we should call them "sexers." (In fact, that is a legitimate word and is used to describe people who determine the sex gender of Foggy's fowlish offspring after they hatch.)

Who will be the first "sexer"? And will he or she rely on Minor v. Happersett? After all, if a woman couldn't vote even though she was a natural born citizen, how could she run for an office she could not vote for?

Is Mario Apuzzo up for the bloviation? Or will it be our favorite proponent of the "sacred sperm"?
Don't we already have one... he of the "sacred sperm" theory? And wimmin just don't count in his missives. :think:


ImageX 4 ImageX36
Image

User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29158
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#3

Post by Foggy » Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:56 am

I think the loonbag in Alaska already went there. You know, the guy who wanted to serve lawsuits by Twitter. I forgotted his name. :oops: :blackeye:


When reality is outlawed only outlaws will have reality.

User avatar
magdalen77
Posts: 5394
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:43 pm
Location: Down in the cellar

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#4

Post by magdalen77 » Thu Feb 25, 2016 10:58 am

Foggy wrote:I think the loonbag in Alaska already went there. You know, the guy who wanted to serve lawsuits by Twitter. I forgotted his name. :oops: :blackeye:
Lamb. I think. It made my lawyer l'il sis literally pee herself due to laughter.



User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 29158
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#5

Post by Foggy » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:01 am

Thanks, Rockwell!

Image


When reality is outlawed only outlaws will have reality.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 45349
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#6

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:07 am

Jedi Pauly is our sacred sperm guy (only the citizenship of the father counts). And Thomas Lamb is the service by Twitter guy. I don't remember Lamb being a sexer -- yet.



User avatar
GreatGrey
Posts: 9864
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 6:06 am
Location: Living in the Anthropocene

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#7

Post by GreatGrey » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:07 am

magdalen77 wrote:
Foggy wrote:I think the loonbag in Alaska already went there. You know, the guy who wanted to serve lawsuits by Twitter. I forgotted his name. :oops: :blackeye:
Lamb. I think. It made my lawyer l'il sis literally pee herself due to laughter.
Tom Lamb was the one who wanted to do service via Twitter.

But he wasn't the "wimmins is ineligible" guy.
That was Gordon Warren Epperly down in Juneau.


I am not "someone upthread".
Trump needs to be smashed into some kind of inedible orange pâté.

User avatar
Piffle
Posts: 6987
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:39 pm

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#8

Post by Piffle » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:26 am

Don't ask me why I happen to know this:

In the world of professional marijuana cultivation you need one or more good sexers to sex (i.e., determine the sex of) your plants. Sexers first locate male plants so they can be gotten rid of before they pollinate. (The last thing you want is a bunch of seeds -- just the nice fat juicy buds from female plants, please!)

Sexing has to be done and re-done throughout the grow because even if you found all of the original males the first time (at about 6 weeks during the "pre-flowering phase"), a few hermaphrodites ("hermies") will develop as time goes on.

These days, serious cannabis producers are increasingly going with clones and/or feminized seeds (it's gotten to be quite sophisticated, really) which reduces somewhat the importance of employing good sexers. Nevertheless, sexing is still an important part of good cannabis husbandry.



User avatar
DejaMoo
Posts: 5085
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:19 pm
Occupation: Agent of ZOG

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#9

Post by DejaMoo » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:39 am

Jon Christian Ryter was one of the earlier proclaimers of this.

Why Hillary Clinton Can't Legally Be President
Author's Note: I originally wrote and posted this article on my website on June 13, 2004. The URL was hit 11.4 million times in a two-day period and was the most read article on http://www.jonchrisitanryter.com in the history of my website. At least one well-recognized constitutional lawyer agreed with the view of the article that, without a Constitutional amendment degenderizing Article II of the Constitution, Hillary Rodham Clinton cannot constitutionally seek—or legally hold—the office of President of the United States. That, of course will not stop the former First Lady and current junior Senator from New York from running anyway and attempting to amend the US Constitution by precedent. If no one files a petition before the US Supreme Court (which is the only court with jurisdiction over this question) and should Hillary win, the Constitution will have been amended by common practice—erasing Article II and opening the door wide for the elimination of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution using the same tactics.
In rebuttal,

Does the Constitution Allow for a Woman President?

This correlates with the recurring bigoted notion on the right that the 19th Amendment should be repealed, because women always need support and if they don't have a husband, they look to gov't for it, and will vote for it. So stupid women created the liberal welfare state, thus the long-term solution to liberalism and Big Gov't is to restrict the suffrage to men, who are smarter and don't need handouts.

Basically, the right-wing view of America is: white men are smart, industrious, strong, productive, and self-sufficient. Everyone else are stupid, lazy leeches. We must restore the country to the rule governance of the productive class.

I leave it to the reader to compare the image the right-wing militia/patriot/teapartier/birther guys have of themselves with the reality (dumb and/or under-educated, un- or under-employed, collecting gov't assistance or leeching off their girlfriends, wives, or families).


I've heard this bull before.

User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8227
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#10

Post by RoadScholar » Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:45 am

Piffle wrote:Don't ask me why I happen to know this:

In the world of professional marijuana cultivation you need one or more good sexers to sex (i.e., determine the sex of) your plants. Sexers first locate male plants so they can be gotten rid of before they pollinate. (The last thing you want is a bunch of seeds -- just the nice fat juicy buds from female plants, please!)

Sexing has to be done and re-done throughout the grow because even if you found all of the original males the first time (at about 6 weeks during the "pre-flowering phase"), a few hermaphrodites ("hermies") will develop as time goes on.

These days, serious cannabis producers are increasingly going with clones and/or feminized seeds (it's gotten to be quite sophisticated, really) which reduces somewhat the importance of employing good sexers. Nevertheless, sexing is still an important part of good cannabis husbandry.
Clones. Polyploids don't seem worth the hassle. Careful if you use colchicine.

Homemade rooting compounds are fun. Careful with powdered enzymes.

Or so I hear. ;)


The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3

User avatar
raicha
Posts: 7347
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 5:10 pm
Contact:

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#11

Post by raicha » Thu Feb 25, 2016 4:01 pm

I can hijack that thread in 8 posts, Tom.



boots
Posts: 3191
Joined: Sat May 16, 2015 5:23 pm

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#12

Post by boots » Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:28 pm

damn hippies



User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 17059
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#13

Post by Suranis » Sun Jun 26, 2016 1:33 pm

Apple growers have been grafting branches of other trees onto other apple trees for years. So the original "golden Delicious" tree has been grafted to millions of other trees so the stem might be "Horrible dung" but the branches still produce sweet sweet "Golden Delicious"


Learn to Swear in Latin. Profanity with class!
https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/lat ... -in-latin/

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3588
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#14

Post by Dan1100 » Sun Jun 26, 2016 3:47 pm

Piffle wrote:Don't ask me why I happen to know this:

In the world of professional marijuana cultivation you need one or more good sexers to sex (i.e., determine the sex of) your plants. Sexers first locate male plants so they can be gotten rid of before they pollinate. (The last thing you want is a bunch of seeds -- just the nice fat juicy buds from female plants, please!)

Sexing has to be done and re-done throughout the grow because even if you found all of the original males the first time (at about 6 weeks during the "pre-flowering phase"), a few hermaphrodites ("hermies") will develop as time goes on.

These days, serious cannabis producers are increasingly going with clones and/or feminized seeds (it's gotten to be quite sophisticated, really) which reduces somewhat the importance of employing good sexers. Nevertheless, sexing is still an important part of good cannabis husbandry.
In furtherance of this conspiracy, the way they make feminized seeds is to take a female plant, turn it into a hermaphrodite and then allow it to self pollinate. They use, wait for it,

Colloidal Silver.


"Devin Nunes is having a cow over this."

-George Takei

User avatar
Plutodog
Posts: 11952
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#15

Post by Plutodog » Sun Jun 26, 2016 3:59 pm

Foggy wrote:Thanks, Rockwell!

Image
" Fark won't allow you to look at that URL ... someone spill beer on yer keyboard again?"

Image


The only good Bundy is an Al Bundy.

chancery
Posts: 1631
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:51 pm

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#16

Post by chancery » Sun Jun 26, 2016 4:29 pm

Off Topic
Sterngard Friegen wrote:While "sex" these days has been devolved into "gender"
This has been annoying me for decades. No one cares. :?



User avatar
Notorial Dissent
Posts: 13055
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 8:21 pm

Re: Are the "Sexers" Next?

#17

Post by Notorial Dissent » Sun Jun 26, 2016 5:10 pm

Stern, hate to break it to you, but the people who determine the sex of baby chicks/fowl, have ALWAYS been called sexers, and it was and is a legitimate job occupation going back to the beginning of the brooder era. I learned the term from my grandmother, so it goes back a VERY long ways. I haven't a clue how they tell the difference, but there is a trick and a knack to it and the good ones are scary fast at sorting and separating. The egg and broiler industry depends on them for their survival, and as far as I know they have yet to develop a machine that can do it. So it is a legitimate term of long standing.


The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

Post Reply

Return to “Eligibility Lawsuits”