54ce153f
From: try.not.to@but.see.sig
On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 07:09:21 -0400, Helen Hall wrote
(in article
):
> On 24 Sep, 23:38, J.J. O'Shea wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 18:23:01 -0400, Patrick Baldwin wrote
>> (in article ):
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Elaine Thompson wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:40:31 +0100,
>>>> green_kni...@greenknight.org.uk.invalid (Catja Pafort) wrote:
>>
>>>>> Brian M. Scott wrote:
>>
>>>>>> You should be asking whether the origin comes to
>>>>>> mind when the phrases are used. That varies by person and
>>>>>> context; at least with 'pansy-ass' it frequently does not,
>>>>>> and I have the impression that some may in fact not even
>>>>>> know its origin.
>>
>>>>> I did not know it's origin, in fact, I cannot recall hearing that
>>>>> precise term before, but it's so blindingly obvious a formation that I
>>>>> did not need that knowledge.
>>
>>>> /unlurk
>>
>>>> "blindingly obvious" *to you*. Not, apparently to Sea Wasp, not to me
>>>> and not to Brian here.
>>
>>> /unlurk
>>
>>> Me neither.
>>
>>>> All in the USA, I believe. I've run across the phrase, but only as a
>>>> general insult along the lines of lily-livered or yellow-bellied but
>>>> with an air of the UK about it.
>>
>>> Aye.
>>
>>>> Which is - I think - Brian's point. In our context it isn't terribly
>>>> offensive.
>>
>>> Not in a "conveys extreme prejudice about homosexuals" way,
>>> but I might be a bit irked if someone called me that, just
>>> like I'd be irked if they called me a whiny bitch. Depends
>>> on person and context, of course.
>>
>>>> I've had to put some thought into figuring out how it is offensive in
>>>> other dialects of English.
>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>
>>>>> I think that, when using terms that create a wide-ranging consensus as
>>>>> to their offensiveness, a writer ought to be aware - particularly if the
>>>>> term is as transparent as the one in question
>>
>>> I see no consensus.
>>
>>>> See above. It *isn't* transparent to speakers of various flavors of
>>>> US English. (I grew up in California, Brian is somewhere in the US,
>>>> I'm not sure where, and Wasp is East Coast - NY, I think.)
>>
>>> Just as another data point:
>>
>>> Not blindingly obvious at all to me, and I'm in Massachusetts.
>>
>>>> P.
>>
>> Not blinding obvious to me either. Much ado about very little, in fact. In
>> Florida.
>>
>> --
>> email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Yes, well you're all bloody Americans.
I'm not. It _is_ possible to live there and not be a citizen, you know. And
I've only lived there for four years.
> Of course it isn't obvious to
> you how offensive it is to others from elsewhere in the world. And
> every time you post a message like this, you're saying, "And I don't
> care what it means elsewhere because your views are of no account."
Given that you started from an incorrect premise, your conclusions are also
incorrect. Wildly so.
>
> Just try imagining if the situation were reversed? What if a word that
> had become more or less innocuous in the UK and similar versions of
> English was still deeply offensive in the US? Would you be so happy
> then to accept that, "Oh, it's OK, it doesn't mean that here"?
I wouldn't give a damn.
>
> Helen
> --
> http://www.baradel.demon.co.uk/
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
