Generate the answer for a given question. The question requires common knowledge of English. Make sure that the answer is in detail, long, consistent with the context, and requires general knowledge of English. To be less repetitive, please vary your language for each question. Give a proper explanation to answer, and if necessary, provide the definition of various terms. And conclude your answer if it's long. If you have used other resources (e.g., Merriam Webster's.) to answer the question, include citations in your answer. You don't need to paraphrase the context of your resources, but make sure that your answer is consistent and complete.

There was the following passage in New York Times' (October 6) article commenting on GOP Presidential candidate, Carly Fiorina under the headline, 'If she's a feminist, then I'm a T. Rex': 'Her record at Hewlett-Packard firing skilled Americans by the thousands and outsourcing their jobs to China and India, while almost running her company into the ground with an ill-advised merger is hardly a sterling record for any sort of candidate, assuming we actually want a president of all the people rather than a modern Ebenezer Scrooge, - - This is a woman who would deny other women control over their own bodies, as well. 'If she's a feminist then I'm a T. rex.' According to Jurassic wiki, Tyrannosaurus rex, the most famous of all dinosaurs species and commonly known as T. rex, was the largest of the Tyrannosaur family and by extension one of the largest theropods, reaching 12 to 13 meters in length. But what does 'If she's a feminist, then I'm a T. Rex' mean? Does the writer sarcastically admit herself being anachronistic? Why should it be a T.Rex, not other monsterous or supernatural creatures, say, Moby-Dick and Godzilla? Is this a cute turn of phrase? Could you translate 'I'm a T.rex' into plain English?.
All that that is saying is that she is no feminist whatsoever, being just as much of a feminist as the columnist is a giant extinct dinosaur. That is, not at all.

Possible Duplicate: How and why have some words changed to a complete opposite? I have noticed that: horrible means bad terrible means bad horrific means bad So why does terrific mean good?.
The meaning of terrific has actually changed over time. According to EtymOnline: 1660s, 'frightening,' from L. terrificus 'causing terror or fear,' from terrere 'fill with fear' (see terrible) + root of facere 'to make' (see factitious). Weakened sensed of 'very great, severe' (e.g. terrific headache) appeared 1809; colloquial sense of 'excellent' began 1888. So terrific started out on the same lines as horrific, but then gained a positive colloquial sense in the late 1800s. The phenomenon in which a previously bad word takes on a good connotation is discussed here, in which it is called amelioration. Amelioration (which has occurred for terrific, wicked, luxury) is a type of semantic change. While it is unclear what precisely happened to terrific, there are a few ways in which this change can occur: Linguistic forces Psychological forces Sociocultural forces Cultural/encyclopedic forces You can read more about it here. It has been suggested (though there is little proof) that terrific became 'good' because of an association with the popular media via King Kong. Other than this theory, though, it is clear that terrific underwent some kind of semantic change between the late 1800s and early 1900s. In 1930 Popular Science was still using the term to mean something 'frightening', and by the 1940s it was used mostly to mean 'good'.

If you, for example, have to add a person to an application whilst that person is on the phone, how do you politely ask for that person's gender if the voice and/or name has not proven decisive? To clarify why I posted this question on this site: I was looking for an answer within the context of the English language and usage. The given answers have proven that this question really isn't off-topic, other languages know different distinctions that are relevant to addressing this issue.
Warning, large amount of explanation, if you simply are looking for the answer, skip to the next bolded area. When asking such a question, think about all the possible outcomes and parties involved, and try to find a middle ground that has the least potential to offend all parties the least. So in this case, it's a pretty polar issue, you have typical gendered people, such as males that identify as males and females that identify as females, and atypical gendered people, such as those having undergone sex changes, those who simply prefer to be refered to as the opposite gender, those that are both male and female and so on. Regarding typical gendered people, you have three distinct categories in regards to how they might take this question. You have those who are comfortable with their own gender and are relatively passive or supportive of gender issues. These ones are unlikely to be offended no matter how you word your question. You also have those who are not comfortable with their own gender, whether it be perhaps a male with a somewhat feminine voice or appearance, a masculine looking female or such. These ones are likely to be your toughest cookie, as it is entirely possible that no matter how well you word your question, it's entirely possible they might still be offended. This is the kind of people Kristina's question seems to be worded to specifically try and not offend, with the combination of apology and statement of obviousness. Thirdly, there are those who are comfortable with their own gender, but are against gender issues. These ones aren't likely to be offended, but may comment that such questions are ridiculous or something to similar effect. On the other hand, there are two distinct categories I can think of in regards to how atypical gendered people may take this question. The first is atypical gendered people who understand that gender issues are an ongoing debate, and that not everyone is comfortable with atypical gendered people yet. These ones are similar to the first category of typical gendered people where they will be difficult to offend. Secondly, there are atypical gendered people who are relatively not as passive about gender issues. This category is likely to be offended by any possible cynicism or potentially negatively seen opinion about having to ask such a question. Breaking down the possible aspects of a question, we can fairly well evaluate which category has potential in general to be offended by each aspect. Firstly we have: 'What is your gender?' The second category of typical gendered people has a relatively high potential of being offended by this question, but this depends on how many previous questions there were and how they were worded. If there were 10-20 or so different, yet similar personal questions asked prior, it's entirely possible they may understand that you're simply going through a checklist style sheet and not be offended at all. 'Are you male or female?' This is a wording of the question that conflicts with potentially three categories. Both categories of atypical gendered people may be offended by this, or simply unable to answer in the expected response, because, as mentioned prior, there are cases where the person doesn't necessarily fall into either category. Black and white question wording for a potentially gray answer, no matter the rarity of a gray answer should usually be avoided. In addition, this still doesn't avoid the issue of the previous question regarding the second category of typical gendered people. 'I'm sorry, but company policy dictates that we ask this question: What is your gender?' A person who lies in the second category of atypical gender has the possibility of being offended by this, due to you apologizing for having to ask what, to them is a perfectly reasonable question. This does avoid potential issue with any typical gendered person, but it does raise another seperate issue of apologizing for carrying out a company's policy, which is generally frowned upon. 'As obvious as it may seem, company policy dictates that we ask what your gender is.' Generally, the term 'obvious' should be avoided whenever possible while asking a question. It is typically considered just as polite, if not moreso to ask a question without the word obvious than with. The word obvious implies an assumption of knowledge on one party's part or another, which is never a good thing to assume, and can lead to offending people with relative ease. The likely offended party in this case would be those in the second category of atypically gendered people. If you simply want the answer and not the full explanation, skip to here. Looking at all the possibilities and outcomes, there are several correct solutions, depending on you as a questioner and the format of the application questioning itself. If the application asks a large list of questions, it is relatively safe to simply ask the question in the same format as all previous questions, likely by asking: What is your gender? If you'd like, you can try and avoid more by phrasing the question like: What is your self-identified gender?, as this question makes no assumptions, nor does it sound like a question that could be easily assumed. If you as a questioner still feel uncomfortable about asking such a question, or it is one of only a few questions, it would probably be best to preface the whole questionaire with a statement along the lines of. Company policy dictates that I have to ask you a number of certain questions to ensure our records are correct. and then simply asking What is your gender? when you get to that point in the questionaire. The benefit of this is that it absolves you of any responsibility of the questions asked, but doesn't necessarily show any disagreement with the company's policy. In addition, this avoids raising any potential issue with one specific question. Apologies for the length of the answer, I know it should be a relatively simple issue, but with the wide variety of opinions in today's society, I feel that it's best to break down such an issue to its core. Hopefully this answers your question reasonably enough.