Here, Rune asks if homosexuality can be “cured”. And then further suggests it’s a disease by saying he didn’t want to debate whether or not it should be cured, only whether it is possible. People were understandably upset and provided snarky replies.
And then tomndebb swoops in at post 19 and re-writes the OP’s question and tells us all to reply the the new version of the OP. I’ve never seen this before, and I don’t think it’s right.
The OP needs to stand or fall on its own merits, not a laundered version written by someone else to make it less offensive. If it’s that bad (and I think it is), then maybe the thread should be closed, or the mods need to discipline anyone who crosses the line of an acceptable response.
Wait, are you arguing that tomnddebb should not have revised the OP to change the wording? That would put you in agreement with the OP, but the tone of your post suggests otherwise.
I come down on the side of tomndebb on this one; I’m just not reading the “disease” thing in the same manner you are; as a deliberate move by the OP to inflame us. “Cure” to an American may automatically mean disease but for a lot of others it basically means change. Clearly the OP is not from the US and for all I know English could be a second language for him/her so to make any implication on intent wouldn’t be something I would want to do. And the version given by Post 19 isn’t any less offensive really; just a little more readable to “our” eyes and use of the vernacular.
PS – the only time I’m surprised by snarky in GD is when it doesn’t happen. So that aspect I’ll just write off to local customs.
I know of one other meaning for “cure” – a prepartion for barious cuts of meat. Does anyone elso know of other places where cure is used for meaings other than this or related to disease treatment.
Also, I don’t necessarily believe it was intended to inflame us. It could simply be what that OP believes. I know somthing of the OP’s history, and I wouldn’t find it surprizing that it’s a simple statement of “truth” as the OP sees it.
If there is a question about the meanings of terms that a person uses, wouldn’t the better resolution be for the person to respond to inquiries and explain on their own what they meant?
Rewriting an OP without the consent of the poster to bring the wording more into line with majority thinking on the SDMB, that should be a nono. I think it’s quite clear the original poster knew exactly what he was saying. If the mods think it was unacceptable then they should delete the thread.
I think tomndebb’s action indefensible. Why not just invent palatable questions from imaginary posters? It’s in the same territory.
I’ll put five bucks on Denmark. I knew someone from there who thought all Americans were ignorant louts; but a long serious of exchanges with a wide range of people cured him of that idea.
I can’t speak to the OPs history or yours for that matter. But I do know I’ve made the same kinds of poor word choices myself when operating in other languages. I give it a pass and my thinking is the mod made a good move on this one.
