# An open apology **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 4, 2003, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414 "2003-04-04T08:04:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/161 "2003-04-06T18:20:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Polycarp \* > \*\*As for you, **Crafter Man** , I suggest a short space of Bible reading. First John would be good, along with Jesus’s comments on how to treat other people. Luke 6:27-45, which I’ve quoted elsewhere on this board recently, would be a start, along with the parable of the Sheep and Goats, which you can find in **Mangetout** ’s GD thread if you don’t feel like breaking out a Bible. Then tell me how a Christian is supposed to treat a transsexual. \*\* Are you saying I mistreat transsexuals? How, exactly, am I doing that? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/162 "2003-04-06T18:49:40Z")
After reading this thread and all related links, the line of Horace comes to mind. "Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus’’ Which, roughly translated, is “that’s a mighty big storm in a very little teacup”. ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/163 "2003-04-06T19:19:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by His4ever \* > \*\*You know, that’s the exact same way I feel about you. \*\* His4Ever, you are a poor excuse for a christian. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/164 "2003-04-06T19:30:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tlw \* > **We’re crossposting here, but since this was directed toward me, I thought I should reply.** Thank you for doing so. I understand your point of view, and I’m not going to say that you are entirely wrong, because I was not closely reading everything around those remarks. I do want to respond to one thing, however, jsut as a point of debate, not an actual dissection of JD’s character and intent: > [@](#): > > \*\* > > I think it’s a far stretch of the imagination to think that: > > a.) JD didn’t know that TG/TS persons are sensitive about their gender status > b.) JD didn’t know that most people don’t like being secretly discussed > c.) JD didn’t know that telling someone that you’ve been gossipping about them is a bad idea > d.) JD didn’t know that saying so in that context was irrelevant and would do nothing to further her point or the debate at hand > > \*\* I disagree with your assertion. a) stops being obvious once someone is openly discussing and acknowledging their status. d) Although I did not read everything in that thread, from what I have read and had explained to me, I can completely understand why she said it. She was attempting, I think, to bolster her own argument that you can’t change your sex, and she was using her perception of Eve as an example. Makes perfect sense. (not arguing the relative rudeness or value of her argument, just her point in saying what she said) As for B & C, well…do you really go through life believing that no one discusses you when you are not around? You cannot possibly, can you? And do you actually consider all conversation between a husband and wife about anyone who is not in the room to be “gossip”, and telling someone later that you have had that discussion is a terrible thing to do? Because I do not share that worldview at all, not even close, so it is incredibly easy for me, at least, to believe that b & c are true. I will clarify again that I am not arguing for JD’s overall position, by any stretch of the imagination. And I think that beyond that remark she went on to be \* deliberately and willfully \* rude, mean, and ignorant. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/165 "2003-04-06T19:38:08Z")
\*\* Stoid\*\* while I don’t go around in life believing that no one talks about me behind my back, I **do** however, hold the principal that to afterwards make it known to the object of the discussion is the height of rude behavior. “ya know, when we discussed you behind your back that time, we both agreed that you were really quite unattractive” or whatever. Yep, sure, that passes as ‘polite’ discourse. and I read the whole exchange. **and** you’re also conveniently overlooking the **fact** that **JD** posted her ‘innocent’ answer to the question **after Eve posted her comment that she wasn’t interested in that answer** , so to continue (metaphorically) to stand on your head with one eye closed and the other one squinting to try and see how maybe, just maybe, there wasn’t an intent to be rude, well, apparently you wish to continue to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/166 "2003-04-06T20:02:43Z")
I wasn’t aware of any preceding “no, please don’t tell me” warnings from Eve, so I’m not “conveniently” (?) overlooking it. I’ll have to go back and look for what you are referring to. As for the “behind your back” stuff… you are mixing two things. What if someone said “You know, when we discussed you behind your back that time, we agreed that you were quite beautiful”? Would that be impolite? Seems to me the rude part is the “you are unattractive” part, not the “behind your back” part. And what the hell does that \* mean, \* anyway? Seems to me that there is evidently no polite way to discuss someone at all. After all, if you discuss them when they are in the room, you are treating them as though they aren’t. And if they aren’t in the room, any discussion that occurs is “behind their back”, and therefore rude. I’ve heard tell of a few saintly souls who never breathe a word, good or ill, about anyone ever, but they are about as elusive as unicorns. ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/167 "2003-04-06T20:10:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Stoid \* > \*\*I wasn’t aware of any preceding “no, please don’t tell me” warnings from Eve, so I’m not “conveniently” (?) overlooking it. I’ll have to go back and look for what you are referring to. > > As for the “behind your back” stuff… you are mixing two things. What if someone said “You know, when we discussed you behind your back that time, we agreed that you were quite beautiful”? Would that be impolite? Seems to me the rude part is the “you are unattractive” part, not the “behind your back” part. > > And what the hell does that \* mean, \* anyway? Seems to me that there is evidently no polite way to discuss someone at all. After all, if you discuss them when they are in the room, you are treating them as though they aren’t. And if they aren’t in the room, any discussion that occurs is “behind their back”, and therefore rude. I’ve heard tell of a few saintly souls who never breathe a word, good or ill, about anyone ever, but they are about as elusive as unicorns. \*\* So… as I thought, you did not read the theads in their entirety. Until you do, why don’t you shut the hell up. You have now shown yourself to be an idiot who takes part of a conversation and behaves as if they know what is going on. Get a cranial rectal extraction done, read the threads fully, and then try and justify/support your clueless posts in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/168 "2003-04-06T20:10:52Z")
the ‘rude’ part is telling some one afterwards, if the ‘discussion’ wasn’t completely complimentary. as this wasn’t. Or were you attempting to suggest that commenting that some one appears to be a different gender than they portray themselves, is somehow complimentary? (the ‘convenient’ part, **Stoid** is that A. \*\*Eve’s \*\* comment was in between the ‘question’ and **JD’s** answer, which you would have known if you’d read her answer for context - you can only get context if you start **before** the comment, and **B** some one else mentioned it here just a few posts up. I stand by “convenient”) ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/169 "2003-04-06T20:23:11Z")
\*\* wring \*\* are you referring to this, which Jersey herself quoted in the very post we are discussing? > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Eve \* \*\* > I think they have already made clear that they think of us as “icky,” mentally disturbed men who “take playing dress-up too far.” I don’t need to hear that again. > \*\* Is that the “warning” that you are referring to? Eve was responding to someone else asking Jersey a direct question of how she perceived Eve. And let us not forget, this was the rest of Jersey’s response: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jersey \* \*\* > Eve, I don’t think you are “icky”, I think you are a person just like anyone else. > > The only issue I have is that I would want to be informed if I was a potantial date for a transgendered person. > > You don’t agree with my religious beliefs, and I know that you think that you think some of my religious beliefs are “icky”. > > oh well. > > You don’t need me to think you are a woman. You seem to be a happy person. As long as you don’t affect my life, I won’t affect yours, right? > > \*\* Then she argued her point some more and said: > [@](#): > > \*\* > Kalhoun, when posting, I see Eve and KellyM as men. That doesn’t mean I hate them, it’s just how I see them. > \*\* So it looks to me as if Eve didn’t want to be told that she was a mentally disturbed sicko, and it also looks to me like Jersey did not then go on to call her a mentally disturbed sicko. Or was it something else? ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/170 "2003-04-06T20:36:31Z")
you need to see what **Eve** was responding to, for it was the ‘direct question’ that was asked of **JD**. so, sequence is: some one asks **JD** what do you honestly think? **Eve** responds (essentially) “I already know what she honestly thinks, and I don’t need to hear it again”. then **JD** proceeds to tell her, (again paraphrased) “Oh, no, I don’t think of you as ‘icky’ just not at all female, ya know”. So, once again since you seem to be having difficulty understanding: 1. PErson A says "what do you really think, **JD** 2. **Eve** the object of the question states specifically “I know she thinks negatively of me, I don’t need it to be repeated”. 3. **JD** comes in and answers the question ‘honestly’, specifically saying ‘Oh, no I don’t think that one negative thing about you, I think this other negative thing about you’ (unless, again, you’re attempting to suggest that telling some one that they appear to be of a different gender than they affirm to is somehow or nother ‘not an insult’ or ‘a positive’ statement) ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/171 "2003-04-06T20:40:35Z")
(hit submit too early) See, if **JD** had truly not wished to insult, and wanted to correct the impression that **Eve** had, she could have simply said (and honestly) “I don’t think of you as icky.” if she really felt compelled to add more, the **polite** thing to have done would have been “And since you decline to have me answer that question, I’ll honor your wishes”. But, instead, **JD** felt compelled by her ‘honesty’ or whatever, to add in the non essential information, that **Eve** and the rest of us, found so gratuitously insulting. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/172 "2003-04-06T20:47:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by wring \* > \*\* Or were you attempting to suggest that commenting that some one appears to be a different gender than they portray themselves, is somehow complimentary? > > \*\* You know better. I have called it rude at least once, impolite, tacky I believe, clumsy and stupid. What I have objected to, and still object to, is calling it, as some have “unbelievably cruel”. And again, she \* \*\* did not \*\* \* say that Eve “appeared to be a different gender than she protrayed herself”. She said she suspected that Eve \* could \* be transgendered, \* and she wasn’t even sure why she thought so. \* Some people here seem to be equating that with saying to Eve “You look like a linebacker in a dress”, which it simply wasn’t. And as long as we’re here fighting ignorance, I felt the need to point that out. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/173 "2003-04-06T20:58:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Bryan Ekers \* > \*\*Are there any online pics of Eve? Now I’m just getting curious. > > Of course, if she ended up looking like Caroline “Tula” Cossey, I’d say she definitely got her money’s worth. \*\* [I’d say she give Ms. Cossey a run for her money.](http://www.geocities.com/sdpeoplepages/eve.html) ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/174 "2003-04-06T20:59:09Z")
of course, you’re not admitting into evidence **JD** s further statements. but, I also disagree that her comment (“I thought she might be transgendered” would not be perceived as an insult to anyone. the possabilities are: 1. the person **was** transgendered. How on earth is it **not** insulting, cruel, unkind, rude etc. to affirmatively point out to some one that you thought so _especially after_ they’d pointedly declined to hear ‘what you really thought’. 2. The person **wasn’t** transgendered. Again, how on earth is it **not** insulting, unkind, rude etc to suggest to some one that their gender is so oblique as to be in question? Bottom line to me, there’s some areas of life that I feel it’s impolite to speculate directly to the person involved - their gender, if they’re pregnant etc. are some of them. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/175 "2003-04-06T21:04:06Z")
I have issues with paraphrasing. Because then you are venturing where you have ventured, which is into the mind and intention of another, and I don’t believe you can legitimately judge people by what you decide you believe they intended. I think the only fair way to have debates and discussions, very most particularly online, where tone and inflection and expressions are not available to us, is to take people’s words at face value. Of course, you can suspect all you want, and take your suspicions into account, but it’s simply not fair to say “I know what you meant”, espcially if you are saying so by comparing someone else to your own particular standards. I don’t think it is even truly fair to look at anything JD said later, after her shit had been throughly jumped, to assess her intentions in what she had said before. She felt very attacked, she got defensive, and she got shitty. That’s so common it barely deserves mention. But even apart from that…I said when I waded in here that I was taking issue with the portrayal of the words themselves. I have no dog in this fight (I can’t believe I said that…too much Dr. Phil). I’m not JD’s good pal looking to make excuses for her. I was just being driven batty by what I believe to be a gross overstatement of the meaning of a particular paragraph. All I’m fighting for here is…well, precision. If you think that JD’s entire attitude and willful refusal to accept the scientific and medical realities of TS/TG people, and her willingness to argue it are rude, I’m not going to disagree with you. I just think there needs to be a distinction drawn. That’s all. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2003, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/176 "2003-04-06T21:18:49Z")
I paraphrased because I didn’t feel like doing all the coding etc. Feel free to replace the specific words, my position remains the same. And it’s totally appropriate to include her later words if they indeed demonstrate what her intention was (as they do). In any event, the sequence is: Poster asks **JD** a question, of which **Eve** is the object. **Eve** posts “I would not like to hear the answer”. **JD** decides to answer anyhow. How on earth is that not rude, insulting etc? Especially given the specific answer? "No, I don’t think of you as ‘icky’. " but going on to demonstrate that she had suspicions on her gender identity. when is speculation on gender identity not at least mildly offensive? especially when the object specifically declined to have that question answered?? fighting ignorance indeed. I still maintain that it takes metaphorical myopia to a degree beyond what I have physically IRL to **not** perceive her comments as gratuitously rude, likely to be offensive. ---
**Author:** ![Mockingbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c68b51/32.png) [@Mockingbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mockingbird)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2003, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/177 "2003-04-07T00:00:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Stoid \* > \*\*But even apart from that…I said when I waded in here that I was taking issue with the portrayal of the words themselves. I have no dog in this fight (I can’t believe I said that…too much Dr. Phil). I’m not JD’s good pal looking to make excuses for her. I was just being driven batty by what I believe to be a gross overstatement of the meaning of a particular paragraph. All I’m fighting for here is…well, precision. If you think that JD’s entire attitude and willful refusal to accept the scientific and medical realities of TS/TG people, and her willingness to argue it are rude, I’m not going to disagree with you. I just think there needs to be a distinction drawn. That’s all. \*\* So, you made your point… Is is it that the dissenters are not conforming to your view that is bothering you? ---
**Author:** ![Pedro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/919ad9/32.png) [@Pedro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pedro)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2003, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/178 "2003-04-07T01:37:10Z")
> [@](#): > > **Bullshit. I’m the one who misquoted (by using the wrong word) that particular lady and I cleared it up quite soon. With an apology for using the wrong word.** Sorry, I must have missed it then but if you say so, please allow me to retract my statement. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by iampunha \* > **That doesn’t mean it’s a nice thing to say about someone. Monty is a deaf Mormon color-blind Navy veteran. Those are all facts about him. If I were to post “truly words to live by from a fucking deaf Mormon color-blind Navy veteran”, that would be both truthful and very much offensive.** I think it was just truthful. There’s no other way to put it. I wouldn’t be able to date a transgendered person. Maybe Eve finds that offensive, if so I’m truly sorry, I’m sure she must be a great person but that’s how I feel. > [@](#): > > **And it does in others. And there are other, less offensive ways to say someone is post-op TG, such as … well, that. The word “abnormality” doesn’t need to be used at all.** Saying you are a post-op TG is different than saying a post-OP TGed has an abnormality. But looking more carefully this wasn’t the focus of the pit thread so I really shouldn’t have said anything. I think the pitting was fully justified. > [@](#): > > \*\*ISTR that the comment made that was taken as incredibly offensive in GD was Jersey saying that Eve looked like a man … Eve, the woman on this board who, perhaps more than any other, exemplifies what it means to be a lady. \*\* I agree that it was rude and hurtful to say that, irrespective of her personality. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2003, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/179 "2003-04-07T01:48:23Z")
Pedro: Thanks for the retraction. BTW, there’s no “If I say so,” as my posting is still in that thread. iampunha: Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [April 7, 2003, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414/180 "2003-04-07T04:35:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Miller \* > \*\*[I’d say she give Ms. Cossey a run for her money.](http://www.geocities.com/sdpeoplepages/eve.html) \*\* I wouldn’t go **that** far, but I just wanted to see what the fuss was about. Well, _some_ of the fuss. The hyperactive fundamentalism defies explanation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-open-apology/166414.md?page=10)