Re: Male/Female thread

Subject: Re: Male/Female thread
From: John Posada <jposada -at- NOTES -dot- CC -dot- BELLCORE -dot- COM>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 23:54:01 -0500

That's my point. If we are to try to anticipate every offensive meaning
possible to phrases that have become accepted and proper in their specialized
area, then 1) we are going to attach (and remind people of) offensive meanings
when none are meant, and 2) you going to miss one.

This is one way of perpetuating offensive meanings by not letting the offensive
meaning die and therefore retain only the meaning it is meant to imply.

I think this PC stuff can get way too carried away.


Excerpts from tech: 18-Nov-96 Re: Male/Female thread by John
Posada -at- NOTES -dot- CC -dot- BEL
> There are any number of things out there that should offend someone.
Why pick
> on something that is not meant to be offensive, isn't offensive, and is meant
> to be enjoyed between consenting adults. I don't know about you, but when I
> write about technology involving slave and master relationships, I don't
> picture any sexual significance. Isn't there enough out there without
> for situations?

Er, I don't know about *you*, but that's not the connotation I was
getting out of that. I was thinking more of the historical significance
of slavery, etc.

(who isn't picturing sexual significance? ;)

fiend+ -at- cmu -dot- edu -=-=-
-=--=- Cthulhu is the Patron Saint of Pittsburgh... -=--=-
Alpha Phi Omega, Kappa Chapter, Carnegie Mellon University

Previous by Author: Re: Male/Female thread
Next by Author: Any medical writers out there?
Previous by Thread: Re: Male/Female thread
Next by Thread: Re: Male/Female thread

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads