Har har har.

It’s not funny. If we have Spivak, this is a logical next step.

it doesn’t imply that the Actor is on the recieving end of the suit.

again, spivak doesn’t imply that the actors are genderless—just that their gender is unspecified. 

besides, the thought of female actors getting hit with a paternity suit is amusing.

Hix: The -ed at the end of the “paternity-suited”  implies that the Actor with this gossip story is the recipient of the suit.

Once I get two named roles, I’ll make sure I get both a female and a male part just to spite you and your so called genders. 

Rule 2.1 says all actors are male anyway;

“Any Actor may add a new film and role to his Filmography”

So the nomic is already gender biased.

Spivak makes me cringe on the inside. It’s creation was a sin against the English language. Regardless of the fact that the masculine form of pronouns is the default form for persons of unknown gender, there already existed a ways to write gender neutral: one, one’s, a person, a person’s, they, theirs, etc… Anyway, my gender is blue.

Doctor: If it makes you feel better, I’d have that gender-bias removed as well…

IRONY ALERT: “It’s creation was a sin against the English Language” should read “Its creation was sin against the English language”. Lack of edit button annoys me.

Never!

SK: My work here is done thanks to the recent proposal by Kevan.