Previous by Date | Next by Date | Date Index
Previous by Thread | Next by Thread
| Thread Index
| LM_NET
Archive
| |
Please. We can get past this. We simply have to. Does it matter that the word "girl," at one time, was genderless--had the accepted, agreed upon meaning of being ANY child? Of course it matters, but perspective is everything. Regarding perspectives about (hu)mankind, the underlying question lies in whether it may be reasonable and acceptable to always see "man" as ONLY meaning males, thus inherently slighting some portion of the race when not strictly pertaining only to males. The simple answer can be gleaned from the statement that I am sometimes gay. I hold the right to make that statement, with the knowledge and awareness that I have absolutely no intent to shock or offend ANYONE and with the knowledge and awareness that, blameless, I thus owe no explanation or apology to anyone. A mature and responsible individual will take proper care in what they may conclude from any statement. And the notion that one must be accountable for the interpretations of those who lack the proper maturity or responsibility to consider one's statement with due care is simply preposterous. This predisposition to vilifying others' intent parallels the ironic argument which finds Twain's HUCKLEBERRY FINN being censored for the presence of the word "nigger," though it is evident that Twain's purpose and intent were in no way derogatory toward anyone, based upon their skin tone. In point of fact, his novel's message offered a wonderfully strong and progressive statement in SUPPORT of reasoned equality. Huck Finn was literally determined to go to Hell (which may be in Michigan), if you'll recall, rather than deny his friendship and allegiance to Jim. It would have mattered not a bit to Huck if Jim might have been labelled bigger, nigger or tigger! Nor did it matter to Jim as far as that friendship was concerned. Thus, I will unflinchingly likewise go to Hell with all such reasoning men, if it otherwise means the word "man" is to be forcibly and wholly "masculated." Insisting on interpreting (dictating) others' communication intent is linguistic hostage-taking. And regardless of the libelous criminality reflected through that act, it should be avoided, simply, as the self destructive, self-isolating act it is. It is tragic when individuals elect to ascribe divisiveness in others, even as they vigorously announce it in and of themselves. After all, where would we be without simple, basic intercourse, eh? Take care. Jeff Kirkpatrick ***** We may never control others' foolishness, but we might work to manage our own. Jeffrey E. Kirkpatrick Profession: adventurer Present Occupation: Self deployed e-mail address: jeffkirk@sni.net =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= To quit LM_NET (or set NOMAIL or DIGEST), Send an email message to listserv@listserv.syr.edu In the message write EITHER 1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST NOTE: Please allow time for confirmation from Listserv. For more help see LM_NET On The Web: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/ =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=