At 08:54 AM 21/05/99 -0400, Richard Aynesworthy wrote:
Dan Plante wrote:
>> And irritating, I'll wager. Okay, done. But in return, I would like
>> it if you stopped the deliberate misspelling of human, among other
>> words. I find it irritating and vaguely insulting. So, you start
>> spelling 'em right, and I'll start spelling 'em wrong, agreed?
>...I think that altering the spelling of a word defining a concept in
>order to illustrate the limitations of its significance [especially
>in a text-based medium of exchange when symbolic construction assumes
>so much more weight] and deliberately baiting someone by calling them
>by a wrong name are wholly different. So no dice. If you misspell my
>name then I shall act as if we are, in fact, in a coffee shop, having
>a discussion, and you have called me Stan [which is not my name
>either]. I will simply not respond.
Yes, I was baiting you and, yes, it was deliberate. As to how this is somehow "wholly different" than what you feel you're doing, I'd have to say you're way off base. I understand that you think you're doing something right by deliberately misspelling the words, and I have no argument with the personal desire behind your stated motivation.
What I do have a problem with, is why you seem to think that it's not okay for someone to rankle you with misspeled words, but it _is_ okay for you to rankle them the same way. Why is that? Objections have been raised before about the spelling, but you continued to use it. Wouldn't you call that "deliberate baiting"? I understand you think you are operating from from a platform of social justice. But what makes you think I'm not? Or did this possibility occur to you at all? Did you stop to wonder _why_ I found it insulting, or did you just assume that your moral crusade trumps my moral indignation?
Listen, we can play the old schoolground-tit-for-tat I'm-not-going-to-listen-to-you-either game if you like, it's no skin off my nose; I've seen 'em come and go for decades on this type of forum. But if instead, you'd like to get past this, and maybe even learn something (I acknowledge the possibility that you really don't know the source and wider historical significance of the terms you're using), then you might stop you're headlong, blinkered rush down the path of righteous social reengineering and ask me why I find it insulting (and dangerous, in a culturally insidious kind of way).
Here's a hint: follow the current thread dealing with extremist memes. Pay close attention to descriptions of how these memes have often afforded their cultural stake-holders with such political power that other people end up getting screwed in the process. Thsi is way past stick-and-stones.