social attention, media attention, call it what you will, I don’t think that is an important point.
I don’t know what to say here, the remainder of the sentence where I use the term “assume” is me telling you what I mean, and giving an example.
And looking at your explanation of circumstances and contexts it is clear that we actually disagree on very little indeed.
By which I mean that not every concept is easy to encapsulate in a simple question. Not every concept is easily explained through an example that works for everyone and in all circumstances. It is fine that that is the case as long as people are willing to work through it in good faith, which we are are we not?
Because I myself remain uncertain about what people mean when they say “unacceptable” or similar terms. Absent of clear answers from others, or a willingness to engage in order to clarify then we absolutely are left uncertain as to what actually is meant.
I think we have engaged and we have moved closer to understanding and clarity.
Context and intent can mitigate the damage of using an inappropriate word, but it doesn’t negate that damage.
Let me give an example involving me.
I know a person who uses “they” pronouns. When I first me this person, they used “he” pronouns. And I’m an old fuddy-duddy who struggles with the singular “they” in the best of circumstance. So I was talking about them last night in a group chat, and I inadvertently referred to this person as “he”. Their partner posted right after me, agreeing with me on the point I made, but using “they”.
I edited my post to use “they”.
First, context matters. No one is suggesting we ban the word “he” from polite conversation. It was only wrong in the context of talking about a nonbinary person.
Second, I was unambiguously wrong to use “he”. That I did it with no ill intent and that I’m an old fuddy-duddy mitigates the harm, but doesn’t eliminate it.
Third, if I had failed to correct my post, I would be guilty of more serious harm, because it’s much worse to intentionally misgender someone than to do so inadvertently. (and we all knew the chat could be edited.)
So sure, context matters. Context includes who says the word, what they mean by it, who or what it refers to, and no doubt lots of other stuff. By and large, any use of the n-word, by a white person, in the US, is wrong. And it’s really easy to stop using a word entirely. Much easier than to police your use of it. (like avoiding “he” where it’s wrong.) So I am going to judge any white american using the n-word pretty harshly. And I’m also going to judge anyone who jumps to their defense. Because honestly, that one is a “duh”. It’s been accepted since my childhood that it’s wrong for a white person to call a black person by that word, in any context. The edge cases are stuff like reading old literature aloud, not actually using the word yourself.
On the off chance that you’re willing to accept even the tiniest iota of responsibility for this breakdown, I consistently find your posts a frustrating combination of supercilious finger-wagging and maddening vagueness. You chastise people for their PC attitudes while clearly misunderstanding what they’re saying. It’s not an unwillingness to engage, it’s frustration with the low quality of your own communication.
One of us has already admitted the possibility of misunderstanding and it wasn’t you was it?
…as I thought. Confronted with the chance to reflect on how your posts cause problems, you defend and reverse and attack. Thanks for living down to my expectations.
Did you really expect any differently from a Pittee? “Double down and regret/admit nothing!” was always the most likely outcome
You don’t get to decide what an acceptable response is. Damn right I’ll defend myself when the accusation can be shown to be false.
If I accused you of the same failing would you defend yourself and use an example if you had one?
I was perfectly willing to accept responsibility for misunderstanding and miscommunication and sought in good faith to clarify. If you can’t take that in the spirit it is offered then there is little else to say.
I refer you to the comment I made many posts ago. The tactic you are employing is the same as back in post 55.
An accusation of a certain type (and certainly in realation to certain questions) is defacto true and any defence or unwillingness to admit guilt is exactly what a guilty person would do. Of course, admitting guilt is exactly what a guilty person would do as well.
Still, no smoke without fire eh? why am I in the pit if there wasn’t something to it?
What actually matters is what can be shown to be true. i.e. those tiresome facts.
You could choose to look at the response I gave to the accusation and say “actually yes, they were willing on that occasion to take responsibility”. Shock horror, you could even do that and still criticise me. But you didn’t. You won’t. Because you are not an honest enough debater to do so.
You do you!
It’s not like my opinion of you can get any lower, so keep fucking those chickens and hoping it’s a fad that catches on.
To paraphrase someone else. I don’t worry that you boo me because I’ve seen what you’ll cheer for.
You do you!
Going with ‘My opinions are facts!’? Bold move!
Taking responsibility doesn’t mean anything if you’re not willing to change the behavior that caused the issue in the first place.
Curse my laziness and desire to save twelve keystrokes!
I officially retract the following sentence.
And replace it with:
See how much extra work I could have saved myself? I has a shame. Thank you for the opportunity to improve the clarity of my writing.
And you’re welcome for the opportunity to attempt to shift the direction of the conversation.
(And why only half a bottle?)
where do you get that from? Facts belong to no-one and opinions are not facts.
Seeking to write more clearly, express things in a different way and ask clarifying questions is doing precisely that.
Weeell, here’s a fact, White folks in positions of power can’t say “nigger” seven fucking times and not expect to be fired!
It is a fact that such an outcome is likely.
I’m not convinced that the new construction is any better. “could never” is talking about the ability to do something “should never” speaks more to an advisory course of action.
I mean, I could never go to the moon (no money to do so and no opportunity) but I wouldn’t say I should never, it might be the trip of lifetime.
Thanks but I’m fine with whatever comes my way. Replying to these posts is a fun diversion.
I currently have only half a bottle left, obviously it is nagging away at my subconscious.