Good heavens. And why is your gender so secretive? Is yours a third option?
I never realized that Carol Stream wasn’t a woman until this thread. I’m all for anonymity on the internet, but that’s ridiculous. I am familiar with the suburb (and it’s no great shakes, but that’s MO). Does the gender secrecy give you an edge on your debate tactics? It’s not working; best try another tack.
Should we be asking what species you are? :rolleyes:
What seems to be missing in this whole compare current political parties to characters in the Bible for fun and profit! is that it is the Reps who claim the moral high ground on most everything. If you’re going to do that, you have to expect some blowback when you are found to be walking on air ala Wiley Coyote. If they weren’t so smugly sanctimonious about things like sex and crime, I wouldn’t laugh and jeer when they’re caught, after their ringing speeches about “family values” in wide stances with their pants down, texting minors sexually explicit material etc.
There are, pretty much, three valid third person singular pronouns in the English language. “He”, “she” and “it”.
Perforce, if you cannot be called either of the first two…
Believe it or not, it does matter to me. I’ve always thought you were an intelligent and valuable poster for the Dope. And even when our politics have diverged, I’ve enjoyed reading your posts.
As I related to another Doper recently, I have as of late become unable to suffer fools gladly. I’ve become weary of it seeming as if “I’m not sure what the facts are, but I’m prepared to be difficult about them” has replaced “fighting ignorance” as the board’s guiding principle.
I know that my style has become more rhetorical-brawling than rhetorical-ju-jitsu, and while I’ll admit that it’s regrettable, I’ve also become disillusioned that for all the talk of the importance of veracity and nuance and knowledge that we heard during the darkest days of Bush’s mistakes, many of his political opponents are simply swapping roles now as they prepare to allow us to meet the new boss.
Rambling aside, I’m just sayin’ thanks.
And now I’ve probably gone and lost those redemption points
Well, without the ability to identify you as male or female, the choices are limited.
I’m a jerk for explaining to someone else that even though you call yourself Carol, you may not be female, and that for some reason you don’t want your gender known here (which seems to be confirmed by your responses)? Many, I think, would say you are a bit overly quick to take offense.
I think I see where our core difference of opinion is. I disagree that simply because of venue, that makes it a negative value judgment. I personally would not make that leap, I would simply judge the words on their standard English meaning.
I think there’s no point if arguing about this difference of opinion, I doubt I could convince you that that’s a not a necessary leap, and I doubt you can convince me that it is.
Thanks for taking the time to explain in such detail your thinking process.
You did ask that, my apologies for not explaining. Here’s how I read the “joke”.
The president lives in a residence called “The White House”
In the past, all presidents have been white.
Perhaps instead of “white” in “White House” referring to color of the house itself, it refers to the race of the resident.
If Obama, a non-white person, lives there, perhaps we will no longer call it the “White” house.
I did not see any value judgment here of white or black people. If the house was called “The Left House” because it was on the left side of the street, and by coincidence all presidents have been left-handed in the past, and somebody running for president was right-handed, a similar crappy joke could be made. “If Revtim becomes president, do we still call it the Left House?” No value judgment of left or right handedness.
Unless the standard English meaning of the words in question have a value judgment, I’m not going accuse anybody of racism.
What’s wrong with that? I mean, if you were offended because someone used the word niggardly, and you presumed it was related to the N-word, would that person be a dick for explaining it to you?
I can personally understand why you’re offended. It’s a joke based around race, which in and of itself can be offensive (as I can personally attest, having been the only nonwhite as several of my schools) but it isn’t racist, per se.
That’s not how communication works, though. Never has. Never will. If it did, the word “context” would be nonexistent and we’d be too busy misunderstanding each other to get things done.
I think I do understand why people see racism there, thanks to the explanations of those who saw offense. I was explaining how I interpreted the text, now how I think you have to interpret it. I’m not trying to prove anything, just explaining my interpretation, which is not racist.
The problem, Rev, is that up until now your explanation has been something like, ‘People come in different colors, right? So what’s the problem with calling a Obama a colored person?’ Historical context can’t be ignored.
