# The Ryan, you are NOT cute! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 26, 2001, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928 "2001-01-26T22:35:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [February 1, 2001, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/61 "2001-02-01T23:38:16Z")
Howdy, **Jackmanii**! Lemme check something… Yup, you still haven’t responded to my last substantive post in your direction. And yup, that means you still don’t merit any respect. You o’er-bilious jackanape. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/62 "2001-02-02T00:09:28Z")
Well, I see the P.C. twins are back to their tag-team routine. Lessee, Gad, that’s about the 5th time you’ve stuck your snout in the air and proclaimed that I didn’t merit any further response from you. But you always seem to come creeping back with some lame rejoinder. At least in the media bias thread you had the pseudo-balls to post directly, as opposed to your aside in this thread. And xenophon - you’d think someone who publicly [equated the U.S. treatment of Native Americans with the Holocaust](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=57325)would have the good taste to be embarassed into shutting up for awhile. Mostly, though, you two are being very rude to The Ryan. This is _his_ thread. If you have too much time on your hands, get your bored, bitchy, ignorant selves busy and start your own Gee-I’m-put-upon-by-Jackmannii thread. Love and kisses. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/63 "2001-02-02T00:55:49Z")
I invite all readers to check out the thread **Jackaninnie** linked to and judge for themselves his reading comprehension level. ---
**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:** [February 2, 2001, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/64 "2001-02-02T02:13:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > **(Stoid said)** you find snideness and sarcasm just as offensive as a direct assault. > > **(jodi said)** I never said this. \*\* > [@](#): > > - \***(jodi said)** I am not convinced it is less offensive to be snide and sarcastic than it is to call someone a name. * * * " you find snideness and sarcasm just as offensive as a direct assault" "I’m not convinced it is less offensive to be snide and sarcastic than to call someone a name "(= assult directly) ??? - The only difference I see between the two statements is a lack of certainty, not a difference in meaning. So to me, it looks like you pretty much did say exactly that. You may not be absolutely sure it’s true, but you did say it. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jodi \* \*\* > Well, you certainly have the right to judge the relative “tone” of the two threads by merely reading them. I, however, who participated in both of them, are not required to agree with you. > \*\* But wait… you pissed ME off, doesn’t that mean I get to be the judge of whether you were being snippy in our thread? Wasn’t that \* precisely \* your contention when you said to The Ryan: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jodi \* \*\* > it isn’t for to decide where you are on it. [the incivility gradient]If you find that you have pissed people off, you can confidently assume you’re too far down it. > \*\* And when you reaffirmed this point in saying to me when I told you the above was not necessarily correct: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by \* \*\* > I will admit I am wrong about the former [the incivility gradient], but not the latter. [latter being who decides] > \*\* Assuming I am not mistaken in my reading of your posts, it looks to me like you want to do all the deciding for everybody… Jodi is the last word in whether others are being rude to her, and Jodi is also the last word in whether Jodi is being rude to others. And this is fair because…? (BTW: “merely reading” is all any of us do. The only greater understanding anyone has is our understanding of ourselves. When it comes to how you or I view the writing of someone other than ourselves, we are all equally disadvantaged, our “participation” in the thread makes no difference in that regard) > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by \* \*\* > “Next time keep your brain on track” and “Would you like to embarass yourself some more?” are not, shall we say, tone. If you feel I am guilty of over-emphasizing them – as you apparently do – then you ought to at least avoid the sin of minimizing them. > \*\* I specifically and exclusively referred to the “brain” remark, not the others, which came AFTER you got your knickers in a twist. By itself, I do not think the brain remark a big deal. After you complained about it, he stepped it up. One more thing, regarding your contention about how pissing people off should be the measure of how rude someone is being… you have an (admittedly) extremely short fuse. I have an extremely long one. The Ryan pissed you off…an easy thing to do…you pissed me off…a hard thing to do. Does that make you worse than him? ---
**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:** [February 2, 2001, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/65 "2001-02-02T02:16:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by xenophon41 \* > \*\*I invite all readers to check out the thread **Jackaninnie** linked to and judge for themselves his reading comprehension level. \*\* Aw damn, do I HAVE to? Can’t I just take your word for it? PLEASE? ohhh…alright… \ ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/66 "2001-02-02T02:20:27Z")
**Stoid** and **The Ryan** sitting in a tree … (Just to prove I can be as immature as the next.) ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/67 "2001-02-02T12:38:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Jackmannii \* > **And xenophon - you’d think someone who publicly [equated the U.S. treatment of Native Americans with the Holocaust](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=57325)would have the good taste to be embarassed into shutting up for awhile.** I’m gonna have to go with **xenophon41** on that one. I read the thread and could not see where he(I’m assuming) equates U.S. treatment of Native Americans with the Holocaust. Could you be refering to this? > [@](#): > > “Obviously, the common Japanese subject did not consider what his Emperor did to be evil, nor did the average Nazi party member believe himself to be evil, nor did the average US trooper in the Indian wars think of himself as evil.” Or should I read that thread again? ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/68 "2001-02-02T14:15:29Z")
Yes. If you rank them together and throw in a gratuitous reference to American troopers meant to evoke Nazi stormtroopers, you are implying that the events are comparable. Not an appropriate response to someone who appeared to be saying “Why are Nazis so bad? Other people did bad stuff too.” But I made my points about misunderstanding of history and denigration of the sufferings of Holocaust victims in that other discussion. ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/69 "2001-02-02T15:41:48Z")
Right. Because it isn’t like the members of the U.S. Cavalry who fought the Indian Wars were [actually called “Troopers”](http://www.trapdoorcollector.com/chacula.html) or anything as silly as that. Or that members of the Armored Cavalry and Air Cavalry [are still called “Troopers”](http://www.comptons.com/encyclopedia/CAPTIONS/20000238_P.html) in the modern armed forces. No, that couldn’t possibly be. How could **xeno** engage in such a gratuitous and loaded use of the English language? :rolleyes: [http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Bunker/3179/troopers.html](http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/Bunker/3179/troopers.html) [http://www.linder.com/berserk/journ113.html](http://www.linder.com/berserk/journ113.html) [http://aircavalry17.tripod.com/](http://aircavalry17.tripod.com/) Is it physically painful when one embarrasses oneself in such a manner, or just the cause of mental anguish? ---
**Author:** ![TwistofFate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/cdc98d/32.png) [@TwistofFate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TwistofFate)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/70 "2001-02-02T15:50:50Z")
From the quotes you have provided regarding Scylla’s view on abortions… 1. Scylla believes that abortions are morally wrong. he does not believe that abortion after a rape or medical advice is morally wrong. 2. He believes that if a woman is to have an abortion, it should not be after the first trimester unless it is by Physicians advice. 3)As it is his own personal belief, and he does not believe it will be made law, he cannot see a moral or ethical conflict in what he believes. 1. Notice the difference between the first quote and the second. It will explain the fourth quote you used. 2. He is reluctantly pro-choice because of this line from the first quote you mention. “I also said that I realize that I have no right to to inflict my personal morality upon another, and force her to carry a baby she doesn’t want” I’ll simplify. As he believes that it is wrong to impose his own personal beliefs upon someone, he is reluctantly pro choice. when he says he is “none the less pro-choice” it is not a contradiction, as he has already said that he is pro choice" I will conceede that when taken out of context, his quotes may appear contradictory, but you can do that with anything. I hope that this answers your question. I was not involved in the thread in question, yet I can understand Scylla’s point of view. Any questions? ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/71 "2001-02-02T17:36:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by pldennison \* > **Right. Because it isn’t like the members of the U.S. Cavalry who fought the Indian Wars were actually called “Troopers” or anything as silly as that.** I’m well aware of that. As well as the need to watch’s one’s references when one is casually linking a multitude of historical events to the Holocaust. Are you the same pldennison who criticized my comments about media bias for not having specific enough references, and who has now posted on affirmative action in Great Debates with a flood of generalities and not one specific case cited? In other words, are you a flaming pus-wart all the time, or just on Fridays? ---
**Author:** ![ENugent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/4af34b/32.png) [@ENugent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ENugent)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/72 "2001-02-02T17:45:30Z")
Hey, **pld** and **Jack** , could you start your own thread for this squabble? I’m still hoping that I might get an actual response from **The Ryan** for my last post. ---
**Author:** ![pldennison](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/9fc29f/32.png) [@pldennison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pldennison)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/73 "2001-02-02T17:53:38Z")
> [@](#): > > Are you the same pldennison who criticized my comments about media bias for not having specific enough references, and who has now posted on affirmative action in Great Debates with a flood of generalities and not one specific case cited? Wow, Jack, you seem determined to establish yourself as a person incapable of reading and understanding English or following a chain of events. And you’re doing a dead-on job of it, too. Let’s follow along, shall we? I’ll attempt to use easy-to-read words. 1. During a thread on affirmative action, a lot of people who don’t work in college admissions made a lot of claims about what goes on in college admissions. 2. Since I have a good friend who has worked in college admissions, I said I would ask him for some insight into the general goings-on in the admissions process _vis a vis_ affirmative action. (Pay attention to that word, “general.” It bears directly on things, no?) 3. He provides me with some capsule information regarding the ways which, in his professional experience and in general, affirmative action policies have been used in college admissions. 4. Nobody in the original thread asked for examples of specific cases. They asked for a general overview of how college admissions professionals use race information, if there are official preference policies, and how they are put into effect. In short, Jack, I provided **exactly the information that was requested and that I promised to provide**. If you want specific cases, I will be happy to ask him to provide them, obviously without reference to the college or names, as that would be a breach of professional ethics and confidentiality. Until then, you appear bound and determined to continue embarrassing yourself. Be my guest. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/74 "2001-02-02T18:04:06Z")
(…and since I picked the wrong week to give up sniffin’ glue…) Sorry, **ENugent** ; I’ll try and stop the hijack right here. **pldennison** , thanks. **Jack’** , just pretend I said “Nazis? Nazis are _bad_ m’kay?” And perhaps you can find room in Phil’s currently active AA thread to voice your criticisms. (See ya there.) ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/75 "2001-02-02T18:14:35Z")
STOID – > [@](#): > > “(Stoid said) you find snideness and sarcasm just as offensive as a direct assault.” “(jodi said) I never said this.” “(jodi said) I am not convinced it is less offensive to be snide and sarcastic than it is to call someone a name.” > [@](#): > > ??? - The only difference I see between the two statements is a lack of certainty, not a difference in meaning. So to me, it looks like you pretty much did say exactly that. You may not be absolutely sure it’s true, but you did say it. Allow me to clarify. First, I was not aware that by “direct assault” you meant “calling someone a name.” “Direct assault” in my world, and I’m sure this is the fault of my profession, is something far different than calling someone a name. I NEVER said that sarcasm is as offensive as a direct assault. It is not. I did say that it CAN be as offensive to be snide and sarcastic as it is to call someone a name – but that would kind of depend on level of the sarcasm and the name that’s being called, wouldn’t it? > [@](#): > > But wait… you pissed ME off, doesn’t that mean I get to be the judge of whether you were being snippy in our thread? Sure. I just don’t have to agree with you. And if you say to me “tone down the snippiness or I walk,” I then know BOTH that I have evidently pissed you off AND that I have to make an independent decision about whether or not I want to continue the rudeness or the conversation, since I apparently can’t do both. What is so hard about this? > [@](#): > > Assuming I am not mistaken in my reading of your posts, it looks to me like you want to do all the deciding for everybody… Jodi is the last word in whether others are being rude to her, and Jodi is also the last word in whether Jodi is being rude to others. You may safely assume that you are totally mistaken in your reading of my posts. I find that you in particular would make this assertion to be so ironic as to be laughable, because it is _you_ who have gratuituously stopped by to inform _me_ that I have no right to even mildly object when someone says “Next time keep your brain on track.” I agree that someone has set herself up as the arbiter of what is objectionable or rude, but it ain’t me. > [@](#): > > (BTW: “merely reading” is all any of us do. The only greater understanding anyone has is our understanding of ourselves. When it comes to how you or I view the writing of someone other than ourselves, we are all equally disadvantaged, our “participation” in the thread makes no difference in that regard) Of course it does, because the participants are the ones who care enough about the issue to post and, more importantly, they are the ones at whom the sarcasm or snideness or rudeness or insult is directed. They are the ones who decide how it feels, and they are the ones to decide whether or not they are willing to put up with it. Not you, despite your evident and incomprehensible desire to wade in after the fact and decree who can or cannot take offense. > [@](#): > > I specifically and exclusively referred to the “brain” remark, not the others, which came AFTER you got your knickers in a twist. By itself, I do not think the brain remark a big deal. After you complained about it, he stepped it up. Several things: 1. I do not care whether or not you consider the remark in question to be a “big deal” or not. It was not directed at you. 2. Not that its any of your business, I did not, as a matter of fact, consider the remark in question to be a “bid deal,” either, which is why I limited myself to informing the poster that he had the choice of being civil or seeing me walk. He apparently could not or would not constrain himself to be civil, so I walked. The end. You apparently have some reason (God knows what) to continue to construe this as something that mortally offended me. Feel free to continue to do so; but don’t expect me to assist you. 3. I have not asked you to review my posts or my posting style and make a determination of whether or not my feelings, reactions, or posts are, in your mind, defensible. I frankly don’t give a shit if you think they are or not because – again – what I say, and to whom, is none of your business. > [@](#): > > One more thing, regarding your contention about how pissing people off should be the measure of how rude someone is being… you have an (admittedly) extremely short fuse. This is again incorrect. I have never said that I have “an extremely short fuse,” because I don’t. I have a bad temper, which is not the same thing. What this means in my case (and, again, this is none of your business, but you seem hell-bent on misinterpreting me, willfully or not) is that while I do not lose my temper often, it isn’t pretty when I do. As it happened, this rather minor exchange – which you persist in recasting as something that enraged me – at no time caused me to lose my temper. In short, and again with a whole heapin’ helpin’ of irony, I never cared as much about the exchange in question as you apparently want me to, even though it is _you_ who now maintains it was no big deal. I KNOW it was no big deal; I never reacted as if it was. In short, feel free to butt back out at any time. I frankly doubt I’ll be willing to respond again in any event, since I never solicited your opinion and, at the end of the day, don’t really give a shit about it anyway, at least as far as this subject is concerned. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I regret responding to you in this thread in the first place, since by doing so I gave credence to your implicit assertion that you have any right to judge me, my feelings, or my actions. So I think I will simply allow everyone else who cares (if anyone does, which I doubt) to read the thread in question and reach their own conclusions on the propriety of my actions, and leave it at that. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2001, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/76 "2001-02-02T18:41:31Z")
[QUOTE] \*Originally posted by pldennison \* \*\* > [@](#): > > Wow, Jack, you seem determined to establish yourself as a person incapable of reading and understanding English or following a chain of events. …Since I have a good friend who has worked in college admissions, I said I would ask him for some insight into the general goings-on in the admissions process _vis a vis_ affirmative action. (Pay attention to that word, “general.” It bears directly on things, no?)\*\* pldennison, I’ve reread your current posts on this subject and the words “general” and “generality” do not appear anywhere. You have made National Enquirer-style announcements about a “ton of information” and stuff that is supposed to confirm others’ suspicions about the injustices of affirmative action. Not only are there no specific cases cited, there are no specific _policies_ cited. I didn’t call you in that thread on your lack of specifics, since I wanted to avoid a tit-for-tat squabble, but since you felt the need to drop in here with your load of misplaced scorn, your inconsistency was deserving of notice. Regardless, I think my characterization of you as a “flaming pus-wart” was over the top and I regret it. You are hereby upgraded to “an insensitive, bad-tempered hypocrite” (with all the rights and honors appertaining thereto). 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![The\_Ryan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7feea3/32.png) [@The\_Ryan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Ryan)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2001, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/77 "2001-02-05T05:14:32Z")
ENugent: > [@](#): > > I ask you, if another poster instructed you to “try to keep your brain on track,” would it upset you at all? If someone said that in a situation in which I believed my brain was on track, I would be annoyed. I don’t think the “would it upset you if someone said this to you” is a valid test in this case. If someone were to say to you > [@](#): > > Finally, I’ll echo what other posters have said, that you seem to have a tendency to argue against what people say and how they say it, rather than what they mean. would it upset you? Most statements critical of a person’s abilities are upsetting. Does that mean they have no place in civilized discussion? > [@](#): > > If not, then what were you trying to accomplish? I certainly can’t perfectly express my thought processes, and I’m sure that there are some that will be glad to take advantage of my saying something that really isn’t quite what I was thinking. But I guess that what it comes down to was that I was trying to point out that she had not comprehended my point, and to criticize her for her failure. I do think that there is a difference between criticizing someone and insulting someone; “you’re not keeping your brain on track” (the implied statement) is very different than, say, “you’re an idiot”. > [@](#): > > Now, if you’ll look at Jodi’s quote and try to think of a way to make it make sense, you should immediately see that it no longer seems weird if the antecedent of “it” is not the word “purpose,” but the word “policy.” Yes, I did realize it. And the fact that Jodi required such attention to detail annoyed me. I **could** have said “How can that purpose not be discriminatory?” But constantly designing my sentences so that they cannot possibly be misinterpreted is just too, well, anal rententive. What Jodi’s post meant to me was that I could not use any pronouns when talking with her without fearing that she would not be able to figure out the antecedent. You have asked me to consider the annoyance that my requiring people to pay attention to detail creates; can you not understand the annoyance that **I** felt when required to pay attention to such detail? > [@](#): > > You can still disagree with it, but sarcastic remarks about the poster’s degree of attention no longer seem quite so appropriate. I wanted her to keep her brain on track, so I asked her to keep her brain on track. Any sarcasm you see you are reading into it. TwistofFate: > [@](#): > > As he believes that it is wrong to impose his own personal beliefs upon someone, he is reluctantly pro choice. > … > Any questions? Could you define what you mean by “pro choice”? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Myrr21](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e495f1/32.png) [@Myrr21](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Myrr21)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2001, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/78 "2001-02-05T05:42:21Z")
> [@](#): > > Could you define what you mean by “pro choice”? Thanks. I hereby nominate this as this week’s quote that best supports the fucking OP. Use a goddamn dictionary, you hair-splitting wanker. It’s in a bunch of them; it has a neat, concise definition. _humph_ ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2001, 8:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/79 "2001-02-05T08:25:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Myrr21 \* > > > [@](#): > > > > Could you define what you mean by “pro choice”? Thanks. > > I hereby nominate this as this week’s quote that best supports the fucking OP. Use a goddamn dictionary, you hair-splitting wanker. It’s in a bunch of them; it has a neat, concise definition. > _humph_ My dictionary has it as “favoring legalized abortion.” I humbly submit that that’s a bit _too_ concise. **The Ryan’s** comment may have been irrelevant, but how exactly did it split hairs? Or do all “pro-choice” people believe exactly the same thing? ---
**Author:** ![kabbes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e99b99/32.png) [@kabbes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kabbes)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2001, 9:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928/80 "2001-02-05T09:40:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Gadarene \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Myrr21 \* > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > Could you define what you mean by “pro choice”? Thanks. > > > > I hereby nominate this as this week’s quote that best supports the fucking OP. Use a goddamn dictionary, you hair-splitting wanker. It’s in a bunch of them; it has a neat, concise definition. > > _humph_ > > My dictionary has it as “favoring legalized abortion.” I humbly submit that that’s a bit _too_ concise. **The Ryan’s** comment may have been irrelevant, but how exactly did it split hairs? Or do all “pro-choice” people believe exactly the same thing? \*\* You don’t think that the comment “ **Scylla** is pro choice” could possibly mean “ **Scylla** is in favour of legalised abortion” do you? Nah. pan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-ryan-you-are-not-cute/51928.md?page=5)