With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". slip op. at 12. In our view, however, the use of “code words” can, under circumstances such as we encounter here, violate Title VII. Indeed, a reasonable jury could conclude that the intent to discriminate is implicit in these comments. Cf. Andrews, 895 F.2d at 1482 n. 3 (“The intent to discriminate on the basis of sex in cases involving sexual propositions, innuendo, pornographic materials, or sexual derogatory language is implicit, and thus should be recognized as a matter of course.”). There are no talismanic expressions which must be invoked as a condition-precedent to the application of laws designed to protect against discrimination. The words themselves are only relevant for what they reveal — the intent of the speaker. See Futrell v. J.I. Case, 38 F.3d 342, 347 (7th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). A reasonable jury could find that statements

A: holding that loose figurative or hyperbolic language may indicate that the statement could not reasonably be interpreted as a statement of fact
B: holding that statements like sharp young people and that the employee was not a forward enough thinker could reasonably be interpreted as evidence of bias under the adea
C: holding that the commission reasonably interpreted the statute as requiring it to assess the condition of the industry as a whole
D: holding that such statements were not even enough for an evidentiary hearing
B.