Rule of Law or Rule of the person-which is more important?

[cobraboy]

Yes, that is true, others were complaining. I thought I made it clear that I became aware of a few women's utter disgust with the consistent use of sexist language over some time, as in a discussion. It is only now that I decided to start dealing with it, in this thread, when it came to be too much 'in my face' and also had a definitive impact on the content on this thread. I thought I had explained the sequence of events it with my women and 'one voice' comment, but that may have been a tad esoteric. LOL

So, to summarize, I decided to mention the poster's use of extreme sexist language for three reasons ... because 1) I knew it bothered others and ... 2) it certainly bothered me. The 3rd reason and part of my decision to mention it, was that it indeed formed an ideal practical illustration of the concepts being discussed here in this thread. For those who know it, utilizing an androgogic learning model in an experiential learning cycle.

As it was, my comment elicited a small war and an almost abandonment of the topic of this thread. I expected a few 'snarky and barky' comments at worst but the manner in which the issue was handled, speaks volumes.

Anyway, I have moved on and I would appreciate if everyone else would too. The point has been made, an answer has been given that the sexist language uses 'man' and 'men' in the generic sense, together with some other 'fine' actions. In the spirit of moving on, I'm happy to accept the generic explanation. I hope that the writer now understands for future, that there are a whole mess of us that do not know how to read 'women' when we see 'men' written. Especially not when we are discussion the Rule of Law vs the 'Rule of the Person'.

I would think that Truly Liberated Women would have come and addressed their extreme disgust themselves, instead of hiding behind a proxy. Wouldn't that demonstrate "I am woman, hear me roar" as an exhibit of personal strength, instead of anonimity? I say, bring forth these highly offended women.

You made the public Big Deal about the generic, collective use of a word OUT OF CONTEXT, Chris. Nobody else.

If I had posted "Women should remain barefoot and pregnant" in a sincere manner, I could understand the disgust, and it would have been well deserved. But I didn't. I used innocent words with no misogynous intent whatsoever, thoughts and words from significant Libertarian philosophers, including Ayn Rand, a female human of note.

But to get all ****y over a word used in some of the world's most important historical documents, and OBVIOUSLY used here in a clear, generic sense WITHIN that context, says much more about you, and your quick-to-offend trigger mechanism, than it does about me and my alleged sexism.

If I searched DR1 for the term "men" used in the similar generic sense, will I find you coming forward with your vitriol there, too?

IMO, you were just looking for any reason to "smite" me, Chris, based on past philosophical disagreements. You may try selling the Victim Sexist Card, but I see it as a side-swipe personal attack by a Mod.

Perhaps you can lobby the Powers That Be to include official acceptable required Politically Correct language to be used in all posts. Then the PC Police can have legitimacy, and folks can choose to hang in a cyberplace where one must be careful of our words, lest the PCP become angered.

You want it to end, and move on? How about an admission you jumped the gun and falsely accused me of intentional sexism? How about an apology? Because, to me, it's YOU that impugned my character.

 

[leekiv]

This whole post is gotten out of hand

I think you should call a truce people and either close this and work it out or just get back on topic. Sorry, not trying to "stick my nose in" but if you folk's keep up this way i can see this getting more out of control.

 

[cobraboy]

I think you should call a truce people and either close this and work it out or just get back on topic. Sorry, not trying to "stick my nose in" but if you folk's keep up this way i can see this getting more out of control.

An apology would help.

 

[El sabelot?]

I think you should call a truce people and either close this and work it out or just get back on topic. Sorry, not trying to "stick my nose in" but if you folk's keep up this way i can see this getting more out of control.

Some of us find it very interesting, but maybe not for the same reasons. And it's obvious cobra was not trying to offend.

 

[johne]

In it's own strange way

it's not very off topic. If one would consider discrimination laws ie;The Rule of Law and people language, whether it be today or in-years-gone-by one might be able to contribute to the thread subject.

john

 

[Chris]

This is what I said one paragraph in 4 .. the 3 other paragraphs dealing with the topic.

(Disclaimer, the bolding is not because I am politically correct. It is because I am not men, I am women and by definition, the poster excluded me and my type from his discussion. That is kinda rude. I don't know if this is deliberate or whether he is simply quoting from a set of literature that was written in the style but I thought to let the poster know that that is rude and not something that we want to encourage here.)

This is what I continued with:

..Just perhaps making sure that you understand what is acceptable language in this instance. The word man is the word man. The word mankind is mankind. The poster used the word man or men. I am neither a man, not am I of the group of men. And I'm not the only woman on this board who is really unhappy about this language you know. If a moderator starts complaining about usage of words, it does mean that there are a few pm's in the box already. So, I ask you and all of man-kind, to stick to acceptable language. The alternative is that you're going to have the women after your blood - which may just be not too cool.

This is what I received plus a whole lot of other destructive actions with my own voice ratcheting up to the extreme. CB protests too much.

Oh, puh-leeeeeze, Chris.

"Man" was the freakin' generic human sense. To get one's panties wadded over that use is just a ~tad~ PC extreme. The generic use in "not acceptable"? I dug through the DR1 rules, and couldn't come up with that one. Maybe one of the double-secret hidden rules I don't know about? Please, pray tell, a link to that rule...

Seems to me, within the context of reasonable-ness, some "persons" are clearly not.

Perhaps men/women/gays/lesbian.hermaphrodite/transgendered/asexual people being unreasonable is the reason men/women/gays/lesbian.hermaphrodite/transgendered/asexual people need so many frickin' LAWS...

Sheesh...

BTW-am I to believe that women on this board took such a degree of offense to my generic use of "man/men" that they PM'd you, and not me. Boy, that's really telling me...:cheeky:

If you don't get it that man/men is not acceptable use generic or otherwise for mankind, and some of us read the words man/men in the specific sense, then you've missed a few rounds of human evolution.

I have nothing to apologize for. I asked someone to moderate language and received cheap-ass attacks in return and now the person is crying foul and doing his level best to make his own actions sound reasonable. This is my last communication on this issue as it is now truly enough and way out of bounds for this forum.

If anyone wants to continue this debate, please open another thread and again try and make it acceptable for me to read the word man or men as mankind. It does not work OK. Bury the wounded feelings, accept that this does not work and move on.

Thanks johne, for getting it!

 

[Chris]

Some of us find it very interesting, but maybe not for the same reasons. And it's obvious cobra was not trying to offend.

It is also obvious from my first to posting on the issue and in the previous post where I quoted myself (yuck!), that I was clarifying and explaining, and not trying to offend. It may also be obvious that I would not accept continued disrespect in language .. deliberate or otherwise.

 

[MommC]

Good example of rule of the person.......

Some people insist on PC language being used explicitly (their rule)while others who are more liberated understand that while the use of a word (in this instance man) may not be PC it should be readily comprehended in the context in which it was conveyed.

I didn't find anything 'offensive' in CB postings, but I did comprehend the spirit of the post even if the literal context left something to be desired.

However, I would like to clarify that I am a MAN - more precisely - a W(onderfully)O(mnipotent)MAN!

Now the rule of law doesn't say I have to be PC when carrying on a discussion and because I am a liberated (wo)man who is well aware of her personal strengths and weakness I say be damned with political correctness, I can tell if you are being sexist or not and am not offended at your lack of political correctness - just get to the point!:bunny:

 

[cobraboy]

If you don't get it that man/men is not acceptable use generic or otherwise for mankind, and some of us read the words man/men in the specific sense, then you've missed a few rounds of human evolution.

Try learning what "Context" means, Chris. Looks like you missed a few rounds of intellectual evolution, yourself, girl...:cheeky:

BTW-nice procative slur...again...with the "human evolution" crack.:cheeky:

I have nothing to apologize for. I asked someone to moderate language and received cheap-ass attacks in return and now the person is crying foul and doing his level best to make his own actions sound reasonable.

Of course you don't Chris. To apologize would mean that you went over the top.

My "man" comment was hardly "unreasonable". Your attack was based on your innate disgust for me from other topics where I took you to task in a debate, and you were looking for an opening to attack. Well, that's how some other folks here see it, anyway. And I concur.

This is my last communication on this issue as it is now truly enough and way out of bounds for this forum.

Surrender noted. BTW-it wasn't your last. You posted about it again to johne. :cheeky::bunny:

If anyone wants to continue this debate, please open another thread and again try and make it acceptable for me to read the word man or men as mankind. It does not work OK.

Please give us a complete list of terms that you find acceptable, so future posters will know precisely what to say to avoid the DR1 PC Police. Are you their Chief?

Bury the wounded feelings, accept that this does not work and move on.

No wounded feelings, Chris. I don't operate on "feelings", I operate on intellect, remember? I do feel intellectually slandered. Big difference.

But wow about damaged character your unwarranted accusations created? Where does one get that back? What about YOUR personal responsibility in that regard, Chris?

I'm still waiting for the long list of DR1 female hiumans that took such strong exception to my innocent, benign comment that they deluged your PM account with complaints. You know, the one's that felt so strongly that they didn't make a public complaint, and had to lurk in the shadows hoping for someone to come to their defense.

 

[cobraboy]

Some people insist on PC language being used explicitly (their rule)while others who are more liberated understand that while the use of a word (in this instance man) may not be PC it should be readily comprehended in the context in which it was conveyed.

I didn't find anything 'offensive' in CB postings, but I did comprehend the spirit of the post even if the literal context left something to be desired.

However, I would like to clarify that I am a MAN - more precisely - a W(onderfully)O(mnipotent)MAN!

Now the rule of law doesn't say I have to be PC when carrying on a discussion and because I am a liberated (wo)man who is well aware of her personal strengths and weakness I say be damned with political correctness, I can tell if you are being sexist or not and am not offended at your lack of political correctness - just get to the point!:bunny:

Is that you. Mom?

Because that was how I was reared. Several folks here have met Mom CB, and know what I mean...

 

[Lambada]

it's not very off topic. If one would consider discrimination laws ie;The Rule of Law and people language, whether it be today or in-years-gone-by one might be able to contribute to the thread subject.john

I agree that it isn't very far off topic.

Some of us find it very interesting, but maybe not for the same reasons.

I agree that it is interesting. I also think that how this disagreement is handled is germane to picking apart that awkward place where the Rule of Law interfaces with the individual. In other words, since we have a 'real life' example, why not use it as an analytical tool?

Particularly since many of us see the 'personal as political and the political as personal'.

 

[El sabelot?]

I agree that it isn't very far off topic.



I agree that it is interesting. I also think that how this disagreement is handled is germane to picking apart that awkward place where the Rule of Law interfaces with the individual. In other words, since we have a 'real life' example, why not use it as an analytical tool?

Particularly since many of us see the 'personal as political and the political as personal'.

I think both sides were making valid points. And that's what I find interesting. Now, on being PC, some of us made conscious effort to avoid sexist language on our every-day conversations, and it just flows effortlessly now.

 

[Chris]

Some people insist on PC language being used explicitly (their rule)while others who are more liberated understand that while the use of a word (in this instance man) may not be PC it should be readily comprehended in the context in which it was conveyed.

I didn't find anything 'offensive' in CB postings, but I did comprehend the spirit of the post even if the literal context left something to be desired.

However, I would like to clarify that I am a MAN - more precisely - a W(onderfully)O(mnipotent)MAN!

Now the rule of law doesn't say I have to be PC when carrying on a discussion and because I am a liberated (wo)man who is well aware of her personal strengths and weakness I say be damned with political correctness, I can tell if you are being sexist or not and am not offended at your lack of political correctness - just get to the point!:bunny:

MommC, what would you say if I used the N word while protesting vehemently that I don't mean to offend? Or call people slaves or from my country, call people blackamoors or something equally offensive. I can quite understand that you personally might not find it offensive to be excluded from the language, but some of us do find it offensive.

We could accept such language, and by that acceptance either signify that we are 'above all this', or by the acceptance signify that we 'accept it'. I would rather be clear about my non-acceptance.

 

[bob saunders]

Etymology

Symbol of the planet Venus, also used to indicate the female gender among animals which reproduce sexuallyThe English term "Man" (from Proto-Germanic mannaz "man, person") and words derived therefrom can designate any or even all of the human race regardless of their gender or age. This is indeed the oldest usage of "Man" in English. This derives from a Proto-Indo-European root "man-" meaning hand.


NOTE:MAN can designate any or even all of the human race regardless of their gender or age.

 

[MommC]

Sure is CB......

Is that you. Mom?

Because that was how I was reared. Several folks here have met Mom CB, and know what I mean...

Not just how I was reared but also because I spent most of my life working in a Males' world......,had to become a woMAN to survive!

 

[cobraboy]

Etymology

Symbol of the planet Venus, also used to indicate the female gender among animals which reproduce sexuallyThe English term "Man" (from Proto-Germanic mannaz "man, person") and words derived therefrom can designate any or even all of the human race regardless of their gender or age. This is indeed the oldest usage of "Man" in English. This derives from a Proto-Indo-European root "man-" meaning hand.

NOTE:MAN can designate any or even all of the human race regardless of their gender or age.

Thank you.

 

[cobraboy]

Not just how I was reared but also because I spent most of my life working in a Males' world......,had to become a woMAN to survive!

So did she, and Grandmom CB...in Mississippi in the 20's no less...

 

[cobraboy]

MommC, what would you say if I used the N word while protesting vehemently that I don't mean to offend? Or call people slaves or from my country, call people blackamoors or something equally offensive. I can quite understand that you personally might not find it offensive to be excluded from the language, but some of us do find it offensive.

We could accept such language, and by that acceptance either signify that we are 'above all this', or by the acceptance signify that we 'accept it'. I would rather be clear about my non-acceptance.

I guess it wasn't your last post, huh, Chris.:cheeky:

Hey, it's just one insignificant man's opinion, but to compare the "N-word" to my use of "men" within the context I used it would be hilarious...if it weren't so pathetic.

I hope you're not serious. You really don't compare them on the "offense" scale, do you? Because if you do, you've just succeeded in making the "N-word" much less offensive.

You're REALLY stretching it now...

 

[Chris]

cb, the issue remains interesting and I will take part in discussion of the issue and focus of this thread. I will refrain from further foaming at the mouth about your sexist language.

 

[MommC]

Guess I should clarify that I'm NOT CB's MOM

but I could be.......


Many a male has learned not to underestimate this (wo)man/(fe)male.

While too many men/males still think they are superior to women/females the more intelligent have realized that while we may not be the 'stronger' sex we're definitely not the 'weaker' sex either.

So why be 'offended' by something that really is not important?:squareeye