Socially speaking, right? Cons utionally speaking, it is protected..
Awkward. Everyone wants a piece of this conversation.We don't allow white people to decide if blacks are offended by the N word, or give Chinese individuals the ability to determine if people from Mexico are upset by the W word.
People get pissed off one by one, not by racial background. JMO.
Take counsel from whomever you wish in the manner of purifying your own speech. Prescribing the manner for the rest us in the phenomenological "we" is pretty questionable IMO.
Common courtesy and being respectful of people is one thing; the notion that usage submits or should submit to the diktat of duly empanelled racial tribunes as to what is socially acceptable to say, is something else entirely.
JMO it's still respectable if not positively reputable to embrace the former and reject the latter.
Last edited by Winehole23; 02-08-2010 at 02:13 PM.
ya know, generally i am more towards the republican party, but when palin popped on the scene i backed off.
anything to keep her out of the white house please.
I'm not saying it should be illegal to use the word re , my concern is more with the mores set by the current social stratum. Should it be legal? Absolutely.
Well, of course, but do you want to walk into a crowded square and yell the word, "######!" to see what happens? I'm relatively certain it would be a collective response.People get pissed off one by one, not by racial background. JMO.
Good advice.Take counsel from whomever you wish in the manner of purifying your own speech.
Perhaps, but obviously we have developed norms for the usage of certain words and shunned others.Prescribing the manner for the rest us in the phenomenological "we" is pretty questionable IMO.
There is that. However, being intellectually disabled is nearly always as little of a choice as which ethnic background you originate from. The heart of the matter is that individuals are being hurt by this word, and as a large group would like people to take notice of that fact. It is less of a push for a law that must be obeyed and more of a recommendation of advice that should be heeded and, at the very least, considered on some level.Common courtesy and being respectful of people is one thing; the notion that usage submits or should submit to the diktat of duly empanelled racial tribunes as to what is socially acceptable to say, is something else entirely.
Well, it does obviously begin with the single individual making a conscious choice. But as long as racial epithets exist and are considered obscene by the general public, so too should these people hurt by a similarly derogatory word be given their time to be heard as well.JMO it's still respectable if not positively reputable to embrace the former and reject the latter.
All JMO as well, of course.
Sure, why not?
That's how social grievances work, right?
People complain, people listen or they don't listen, people respond to that, some people try to respond and somehow fail, and yet others like myself stand around complaining about all the complainers and failures.
![]()
Social norms exist and one ignores them at his/her own risk. Agree 100%.
I can appreciate this point of view. I tend more toward republicans than democrats perhaps, but can never really embrace either. BUT, having said that, Palin pretending to be victimized by anything in the world just pisses me off so badly that I cannot credit it as being worthwhile. That is not rational, I recognize. My reaction to Palin is not rational. ...Palin is not rational.
And since Palin is backing Perry I don't know what the I'm gonna do in the Governor's race. I hate to sit out any election, but it may come to that this time.
We can't all be winners, WH.![]()
That's ok with me.
Vote for Shamwow. At least he has actually created jobs.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)