I realize I’m late to this little party, and that it is in Coldfire’s honor, but I feel that I really must, again, comment on the thread title (get your “ignore lists” ready, everyone!).
I would like to direct you to the following entry in OpalCat LiveJournal:
Notice anything peculiar about that title? All I can say is Hot Damn, I must be validated, too!
Now, I felt that I have maintained a great deal of restraint over the past few days, considering my first inclination after your (assuming you can read this, OpalCat) little tirade against me was to launch a Pit thread that would have, in all likelihood, gotten me banned. But, I felt, it’s not worth it. You’re not worth it. I like this place, and I’m not going to let you ruin it for me, nor drive me away.
Then, I see this thread. I therefore wish to say this:
OpalCat, you are a fucking hypocrite.
OpalCat, you are a fucking coward for hiding behind your LiveJournal and your ignore list. You got a beef with me, take it to the Pit, as you did with Coldfire, or take it to email.
I will leave it to others to determine if you are, in fact, a fucking idiot.
Look, when you analogize one thing with another, you are comparing them. That is what an analogy is. Many people here find a comparison – any comparison – between leather-bound books and human-bound lampshades to be hugely offensive – no matter the context, no matter what the analogy was used to show. As I have said, it was not the intent behind the analogy that offended, but the very fact the analogy was drawn in the first place.
You may not agree with this, but can you at least see it? Or are you being deliberately obtuse?
Darwin’s Finch-
I applaud you for your restraint. However, it would probably be best to just let it go.
Posting yet another link to Opal’s LiveJournal (the first, of course, posted in the OP in lieu of a thread link to the actual occurence :rolleyes: ) just feeds and fuels this ridiculous drama queen behavior.
I mean, the overall post and journal content is just not that interesting. There are too many worthy discussions around here.
Let some people behave like adoescents.
You have better things to do. Like you said, it’s just not worth it…
It isn’t that people didn’t understand the point…we all did. But using the Holocaust in such a casual fashion to prove a minor point is deeply offensive.
How about this?
“Why don’t you forgive Fred for hitting your car? It happened six months ago.”
“It doesn’t matter how long ago it happened. Should we forgive Hitler for the extermination of 6 million men, women, and children during the Holocaust?”
See, that’s bloody disgusting to use the Holocaust in such a fashion. It’s beyond rhetorical overkill; it’s a affront to the moral sensibility of any rational person to have an historical obscenity used in such a trivial way.
Okay. But look at it from my point of view: The analogy, intentionally or not, was massively inappropriate and very offensive to people who perceived – with some justice – that OPAL was in some way – any way – comparing the two. Even assuming she did not intend the offense, which I do assume, the analogy was a terrible one. As JAR said, it’s like comparing mass electrocution of people to the use of a bug zapper: Even if your point is nothing more than “both are bad,” they should not be linked as if they are in any way comparable. I am not compelled to make a “critical assessment of the point OPAL was trying to make,” because my problem is with the manner in which she made it.
To the extent it’s become “a big hoohah,” it’s because OPAL, in a fit of seeming insanity, started this Pit thread virtually inviting people to weigh in on the issue. Well, I’m weighing in: I think the analogy was particularly unfortunate (to say the least); I don’t think COLDFIRE’s reaction was out of line; and I don’t think I or anyone else has been deliberately obtuse in so concluding.
