Does it bother people who are anemic when the adjective "anemic" is used as an adjective to describe a hockey team's power play? I would suspect not since the word has its own separate (but still very related) meaning in that context and the word is not being used derogatorily to demean anemics. Still, with so many other options out there, why not use something that is not a chronic disorder?
What about when a baseball team's offence is described as "impotent"? Do old guys with Cialis prescriptions squirm when they hear that? If so, commentators should probably think of something else to say since old guys with Cialis prescriptions are a key demographic for baseball.
What other medical conditions are also used as adjectives for describing bad play? It's not like you hear the play of lumbering linemen labelled "polioesque" or anything like that. I'm sure someone nicknamed the Chicago Bulls offence "cardiovasular disease" because it was so congested in the Eastern Conference Finals, but that is in jest and the object of scorn is the Bulls, so I can cut that some slack.
Maybe I'll start characterizing Andrea Bargnani as "athlete's footy" since he's flaky and his feeble condition seems to be spreading through the locker room.
No comments:
Post a Comment