Tiffin, machosexuals, and more etymologyical abuse

The wonderful Word Wide Words site has satisfied my curiosity about tiffin, and, in the process, given me a clue as to why in Britain the word "dinner" can mean the mid-day meal (lunch), a meal in the early evening (tea) or even a late evening meal (supper). Apparently, until the nineteenth century, dinner, as the main meal of the day, was usually taken in the afternoon, but later it was moved to the evening, necessitating a lighter meal taken at mid-day to tide people over; this became known as "lunch" (a term which had already been in use) or "tiffin" in India (not an Indian word but a British slang term meaning "drinking"). However, in parts of England (particularly the North and Midlands), it stayed where it was, or even moved earlier in the day, so that the mid-day meal was "dinner" (which is why schools have dinner ladies, not lunch ladies).

Another entry in the same site notes the appearance of the word "machosexual", the opposite of the equally clumsy "metrosexual" (which I would have thought should mean "moderately sexual"). A machosexual man has no interest in grooming or hygeine products, loves good old-fashioned manly pursuits, and is bluff and rugged (and presumably, because of the aforementioned lack of interest, smelly). If this is the case, what is wrong with "macho" on its own? I would have thought that a machosexual was not a person who displayed macho characterstics, but a person who was sexually attracted to the same.

Incidentally, when the word "macho" entered popular speech in the early 80s, there was some disagreement about how to pronounce it, with most people pronouncing it "matcho", but a determined minority insisting that it be pronounced "macko". This is a good example of how a little philology can be a dangerous thing. The assumption was either that the word was Italian (in which case "macko" would be correct) or simply that it was foreign, and the best way to pronounce foreign words is the most counter-intuitive. Of course, since the word is Spanish, it should rhyme with "nacho".

Speaking of linguistic blunders, I note the "his-story" myth is still going strong, as witnessed by an article in that nutty right-wing site Opinion Journal: "The pope believed that 'history' is His-story - the story of God's quest for man." Since the papal office is one of the few jobs that still require a knowledge of Latin, I find this extremely unlikely.