c3b4ba11   
   From: b.scott@csuohio.edu   
      
   On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:23:09 +0100, Catja Pafort   
    wrote in   
      
   in rec.arts.sf.misc:   
      
   > Brian M. Scott wrote:   
      
   >> On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:33:43 +0100, Catja Pafort   
      
   >>> Brian M. Scott wrote:   
      
   >>>> 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.   
      
   >>> But that means denying the existence of offensive words;   
   >>> and I cannot believe that you mean to do that.   
      
   >> It's more a matter of placing an upper bound on the   
   >> possible *inherent* offensiveness of a word and holding   
   >> certain expectations about reasonable behavior.   
      
   > Nobody has behaved in an unreasonable manner in this thread.   
      
   I really, really, really don't want to start it up again,   
   but it should be pretty clear that I *did* think that some   
   people reacted more strongly than was really necessary or   
   justified.  That's not quite the same as 'in an unreasonable   
   manner', but it's clearly leaning in that direction.   
      
   [...]   
      
   > There are also words that have _positive_ connotations -   
   > are you saying you're surprised that people should be   
   > only mildly pleased at being praised highly and that it's   
   > unreasonable for them to react in accordance to the   
   > intensity of the words they are praised with?   
      
   How many times do I have to say that I can't separate the   
   words from the context?  In some contexts 'not bad' is very   
   high praise; in others 'outstanding' means very little.  In   
   some contexts 'oustanding' can be downright insulting.   
      
   >> As I see it, the offensiveness of a word lies in the context   
   >> in which it's used and people's reactions to it, not in the   
   >> word itself.   
      
   > So if you have a word that's used regularly by a small   
   > group, none of whom are the target group of the   
   > offensiveness, and none of whom take offense at it, it's   
   > not an offensive word?   
      
   > And if I happen to be deeply offended by a word that   
   > nobody else finds offensive, does that make it into an   
   > offensive word?   
      
   From my point of view your questions are unanswerable:   
   neither provides a real context.   
      
   [...]   
      
   >> I'm just saying that   
   >> barring pretty unusual circumstances, I've very little   
   >> sympathy with reactions so strong that they cause the   
   >> context to be ignored.   
      
   > I think there are terms that have an inherent context of   
   > 'this word is used to insult group x,' and it's a context   
   > a writer ought to be aware of.   
      
   Ideally, yes.  If you've read my posts in this thread, you   
   must know that I'm well aware of this.  I, however, have   
   been discussing the complementary responsibility of the   
   reader.   
      
   Brian   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)