When you use a phrase like “make any (object) it's (sic) bitch”, there’s no equivocation as to its meaning - it’s always meant what it’s always meant: the sexual violation of another person of lower standing within a heirachy. There’s really no other way that phrase is used, unless you’re trying to be provocative or are simply ignorant of its meaning.
So while you’ve argued - again - that it’s just “rude” for one to criticize a product one’s never heard, it seems you’re either unwilling, or unable, to acknowledge responsibility for the choice of words you’ve continued to employ throughout this thread. Which is ironic, really, given you seem so willing to be offended by the “rude-ness” of an anonymous poster criticizing your reviewer status, while being willfully oblivious to the potential offence caused to others by both your choice of “colorful descriptive” terminology, not to mention your self-justification that your politics gives you the right to offend without consequence.
Perhaps it’s just the way I think. Fair enough, I may be in the minority, and like I say, do as thou wilt. But it might be worth weighing up whether the “offense” caused by a poster disagreeing with you on a open forum populated by the privileged few is really the equivalent of using a very unambiguous phrase referencing sexual violence which has and continues to affect men, women and children the world over.
