What the fuck?
ETA: I’m not reporting your post because I assume I’m being whooshed or something, or missing some context.
Why it is done is important. If someone’s speech if protested against because it promotes intolerance, do you think that it is equally valid to object to protesting against speech that promotes tolerance?
Moderating:
I’d like to remind all posters that
“loony left” is pretty close to an accusation of “mentally ill”, and making a fuss about someone who is nonbinary and uses “they” pronouns is pretty close to deliberately misgendering an off-board figure.
You are obviously free to believe whatever you like in the privacy of your own home. But everyone please drop these examples from your posts here on the SDMB.
People have the right to protest against any speech that they don’t like. Validity is not something that comes into it.
I was referring to surpression of speech (which includes protest speech) and I stand by my comment that we all should denounce it no matter what side is doing it.
Like I said, it’s less about side, and more about reason.
If what you are saying is that those are inseparable, and that one side will always be preaching intolerance, then your more pessimistic than I.
If that’s not what you are saying, then sides don’t enter into it.
No, I certainly don’t think that. Intolerance comes in many guises, and a manifestation of intolerance is surpression by those powerful enough to do so. I think ee should be wary of our natural human tendency to either let it slide or even encourage it when it happens to be “our” side that does it.
well now that’s a bit of a leap from what i said… this has nothing to do with how people feel about prisoners or about how prisoners themselves are treated, and more to do with the fact that swapping one word for a different word has virtually zero practical impact.
i would never claim to be an expert in this area but i don’t see anything objectively derogatory about the word “inmate.” it’s just a word. i might be in the minority but how some words get imbued with mysterious powers and other words are somehow deemed acceptable is just… unimportant (TO ME, i can only speak for myself…) i try to be respectful and call people whatever they want to be called but i will probably never understand it.
It can and does however result in denial for many of them.
From a distance it might seem reasonable to apply the one term to all in a group. But as a practical matter it might be likely to result in harm to use the same term for the worst kind of offender as one might use for (1) a juvenile offender who is amenable to treatment or (2) someone who has never offended at all.
I personally haven’t seen monkey bars since the 1980s. They became less popular as they became a center for liability due to injuries.
Monkey bars can also refer to the horizontal ladder style, not just the bone-breaking boxy tower.
So, there are still monkey bars and they are called monkey bars.
ETA: cite.
Given that the virus is of African origin,
Monkeypox virus is carried by animals including primates. It was first identified by Preben von Magnus in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 1958 in crab-eating macaque monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) being used as laboratory animals. The 2003 outbreak in the United States was traced to prairie dogs infected from an imported Gambian pouched rat from Ghana.
Monkeypox virus causes disease in both primates and in other animals. The virus is mainly found in tropical rainforest regions of Central and West Africa.
and, clearly, as noted above, isn’t just a ““monkey”” virus, let alone just a primate virus.
And the fact that,
really raises the question of why one can’t suggest that monkeypox might be overdue for a name change without being called “left” let alone “loony”.
I won’t suggest that even recognizing that there have been historical racist connotations with the word “monkeys” puts you in the “”“looney left”“” according to some people @bump.
That’s what monkey bars were when I was a kid.
The fact of the matter remains that it’s NOT a racist name. Any name changes are either particularly lame virtue signaling, or absurd fear that someone, somewhere might possibly misconstrue the name.
Neither is a good reason in my book for changing the name.
This is what they used to be:
ETA: Why could you possibly care whether it’s called monkeypox or something else? What possible difference does it make to you? Are you doing your doctorate on it and may have to copy/replace it with something?
If it offends enough people and it doesn’t matter to you, why the complaint?
Actually, the best reason to change the name is that it’s misleading. It’s not really a monkey virus, and doesn’t (or didn’t) spread especially well between monkeys, just as it wasn’t really a human virus. It was really a rodent virus that happened to be noticed first in a monkey.
I don’t see it as “lame” signalling, but rather, removing something that could be problematic.
Not running down the road screaming the N-word is a form of virtue signalling, too.
Or the very real concern that people will and have intentionally misconstrued the name for the purpose of denigrating others.
That’s fair, and a reasonable opinion. But the question isn’t, “What do you disagree is a good reason for changing a name?” but “What’s too ‘Loony Left?’”. And your claim here seems to be that it’s “Loony” to be aware that the current name for our latest pandemic could be problematic.
But I am going to go out on a limb and guess that those who are upset at the idea of changing the name of monkey pox are also unhappy about spongy moths, which used to be named with an ethnic slur.
Spongy Moth - NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Having spent a lot of time removing the moth and its egg cases, “spongy moth” is, imho, an excellent name.
Was anyone offended?
That’s my point- this is loony left, because it’s a name change because someone might be offended, even though there’s no racist anything there.
Should we stop calling monkeys “monkeys”?
Which is really funny since it isn’t the left that has the problem with the names of things changing :cough: Potatohead.