From: b.scott@csuohio.edu
On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:08:47 +1200, Zeborah
wrote in
in
rec.arts.sf.misc:
> Brian M. Scott wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:58:05 +1200, Zeborah
>> wrote in
>> in
>> rec.arts.sf.misc:
[...]
>>>> It seems to me that you are assuming that the problem is on
>>>> the writer's end and refusing to consider the possibility
>>>> that it might be on the reader's end. Perhaps it *is* on
>>>> the writer's end -- I don't claim to know for sure what Sea
>>>> Wasp actually had in mind -- but it seems a bit ungenerous
>>>> to assume so when one can ask.
>>> I've lost track: are you here talking about the quotation
>>> marks or about the offensiveness of the words?
>> I'm talking about what he wrote -- words, quotation marks,
>> what you know of him from having read his posts for years,
>> the whole shebang. Are you saying that you're objecting to
>> the words themselves, irrespective of their context?!
> I'm objecting to the words themselves:
> * irrespective of his intent, yes;
> * irrespective of their context, no -- but that context
> includes the fact that they would be read in New Zealand
> and in the UK.
Then I suspect that we have a fundamental disagreement of
principle, ...
[...]
> So. Right from the start I knew very well that he did not
> intend to offend; indeed I thought that this was so
> obvious that I didn't realise it was necessary to say
> that I knew it. But regardless of his intent, the words,
> read in NZ, are offensive.
... and here's where it lies. I can't bring myself to care
very much if someone is offended by the mere appearance of a
word on the page/screen, irrespective of the context in and
likely intent with which they're used. That's a level of
sensitivity that I just can't make myself see as reasonable,
and I don't expect anyone to cater for it.
[...]
Brian
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
