Banning gay/lesbo marriages?

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 03:17pm

Frank Hipper wrote:Running the hazard of guessing, it could be that "lesbo" has a history of being used derogatively, couldn't it? I mean come on....

That's a variation on the "Is because it is" circular logic crap.

It's a dimunitive form of the word lesbian, and when diminutives are used without consent, offense is normally taken.

Well, shit, I should belt the next person in the mouth that calls me "Dave" and yell "THAT'S DAVID, YOU ASSWIPE!" since I invariable introduce myself as David, shouldn't I?

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 03:18pm

Frank Hipper wrote:Did you find my argument more satisfactory, Gil?

*points above*

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-08-03 04:13pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Frank Hipper wrote:Running the hazard of guessing, it could be that "lesbo" has a history of being used derogatively, couldn't it? I mean come on....
That's a variation on the "Is because it is" circular logic crap.

Why do words have accepted meanings if not for history of usage?

It's a dimunitive form of the word lesbian, and when diminutives are used without consent, offense is normally taken.
Well, shit, I should belt the next person in the mouth that calls me "Dave" and yell "THAT'S DAVID, YOU ASSWIPE!" since I invariable introduce myself as David, shouldn't I?

That's almost the exact response my brother David has when someone calls him Dave. And a German David I met about ten years ago was even worse. Not saying you should act like that, but some people do. For another example, I may be Tommy to my family, but NO ONE else calls me that.
It's one thing to expect a logical rationale in a discussion, but call the next black guy you see on the street nigger, and try explaining to him that you need an explanation why "nigger" offends.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 04:20pm

Frank Hipper wrote:Why do words have accepted meanings if not for history of usage?

What you don't see to be getting is that it doesn't explain why it's offensive in the first place. Does it make any sense to say "It's offensive because it's always been that way"? Of course not. That's the sort of thing that leads to people getting mad without knowing why they are mad to begin with, which is a fantastically stupid practice.

That's almost the exact response my brother David has when someone calls him Dave. And a German David I met about ten years ago was even worse. Not saying you should act like that, but some people do. For another example, I may be Tommy to my family, but NO ONE else calls me that.

Wow, it sounds like you guys are just really easy to offend then. But it doesn't explain why it's offensive to shorten a name in the first place.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-08-03 04:28pm

You're saying that there are no insults?

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 04:32pm

Frank Hipper wrote:You're saying that there are no insults?

There are, it's just that insults are only insulting because their is a reason that they are insulting. So far, no one has actually posted why "lesbo" is an insult.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-08-03 04:37pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Frank Hipper wrote:You're saying that there are no insults?
There are, it's just that insults are only insulting because their is a reason that they are insulting. So far, no one has actually posted why "lesbo" is an insult.

It's an emotional response to an unwelcome dimunitive term.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 04:43pm

Frank Hipper wrote:It's an emotional response to an unwelcome dimunitive term.

You are not making any sense. What is so offensive about a short hand term?

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-03 04:52pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:You are not making any sense. What is so offensive about a short hand term?

It is often USED derogatively. Thats how it becomes insulting, constant use of the word in a negative context embues upon he word a negative meaning of its own.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 05:00pm

kojikun wrote:It is often USED derogatively. Thats how it becomes insulting, constant use of the word in a negative context embues upon he word a negative meaning of its own.

By that logic, anything can be offensive as long as it's said in a mean way, you computer chassis. I'm talking about a specific reason.

XaLEv · Post by **XaLEv** » 2003-08-03 05:08pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: You are not making any sense. What is so offensive about a short hand term?

A person named David may feel insulted by being called Dave by a stranger because that person has overstepped his bounds as a stranger by using a diminuitive/familiar name. Personal space, basically. This can be easily expanded to include non-personal names.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-08-03 05:12pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Frank Hipper wrote:It's an emotional response to an unwelcome dimunitive term.
You are not making any sense. What is so offensive about a short hand term?

And you're being purposefully obtuse. You're demanding a logical explanation for an emotional response to a word that is unwelcome, be-littling, a common insult, impolite, mocking, on the point of being mysoginistic, and a modified form of the original "lesbian" that implies a lack of respect.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 05:14pm

XaLEv wrote:A person named David may feel insulted by being called Dave by a stranger because that person has overstepped his bounds as a stranger by using a diminuitive/familiar name. Personal space, basically. This can be easily expanded to include non-personal names.

There is nothing offensive about it. It's just a syllable shorter. You are going to have to explain how not saying the "-id" syllable turns it into a personal insult.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2003-08-03 05:17pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
XaLEv wrote:A person named David may feel insulted by being called Dave by a stranger because that person has overstepped his bounds as a stranger by using a diminuitive/familiar name. Personal space, basically. This can be easily expanded to include non-personal names.
There is nothing offensive about it. It's just a syllable shorter. You are going to have to explain how not saying the "-id" syllable turns it into a personal insult.

why is asshole an insult then? why is calling someone part of a creatures body an insult?

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-08-03 05:22pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: There is nothing offensive about it. It's just a syllable shorter. You are going to have to explain how not saying the "-id" syllable turns it into a personal insult.

Then why is it that I always tell people not to call me "Dave"?

XaLEv · Post by **XaLEv** » 2003-08-03 05:23pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: There is nothing offensive about it. It's just a syllable shorter. You are going to have to explain how not saying the "-id" syllable turns it into a personal insult.

Because it is a familiar term used by a stranger, which is seen as an invasion of personal space.

Please do try to pay attention this time.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 05:26pm

Frank Hipper wrote:And you're being purposefully obtuse. You're demanding a logical explanation for an emotional response to a word that is unwelcome, be-littling, a common insult, impolite, mocking, on the point of being mysoginistic, and a modified form of the original "lesbian" that implies a lack of respect.

Hardly. You are just making up bullshit because you don't have a rational reason. You are absolutely refusing you explain why it is all those things. Why is replacing that "-ian" with an "-o" disrespectful? Why is it a common insult? It's becoming increasingly clear that you do not have a good reason that isn't some form of logical fallacy.

I swear, people are so damn offended nowadays.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 05:27pm

XaLEv wrote: Because it is a familiar term used by a stranger, which is seen as an invasion of personal space.

Please do try to pay attention this time.

Except it isn't. I would know, being a David and all. Now post a detailed rational explaination why what you are saying is true, or shut up.

XaLEv · Post by **XaLEv** » 2003-08-03 05:32pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: Except it isn't. I would know, being a David and all. Now post a detailed rational explaination why what you are saying is true, or shut up.

So you are representative of every single David past, present and future? Astonishing.

You personally aren't offended by being called Dave. Great. You are not everyone.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 05:35pm

XaLEv wrote:So you are representative of every single David past, present and future? Astonishing.

You personally aren't offended by being called Dave. Great. You are not everyone.

But it isn't a personal invasion of space. It's not like everyone says Dave and it seems like suddenly they are standing six inches from you face or crowding you. It's just not saying the "-id" syllable at the end and there is no reason why that should offend anyone..

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-03 05:36pm

lesbo didnt immediately become offensive, but ANY word can indeed become offensive, dude. sufficient amount of use in a negative context will make any word offensive.

XaLEv · Post by **XaLEv** » 2003-08-03 05:45pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: But it isn't a personal invasion of space. It's not like everyone says Dave and it seems like suddenly they are standing six inches from you face or crowding you.

Metaphor, man. You don't have to literally feel like they're right up on you to be uncomfortable.

It's just not saying the "-id" syllable at the end and there is no reason why that should offend anyone..

But it does offend. Emotion is not rational.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2003-08-03 05:48pm

XaLEv wrote:Metaphor, man. You don't have to literally feel like they're right up on you to be uncomfortable.

Except personal space invasion is a specific thing. You shouldn't have said it in the first place if you just meant "makes one uncomfortable".

But it does offend. Emotion is not rational.

You aren't able to post a good reason why it should. Concession accepted. Only stupid people get mad over something when they don't know why they are mad in the first place.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-08-03 05:52pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Frank Hipper wrote:And you're being purposefully obtuse. You're demanding a logical explanation for an emotional response to a word that is unwelcome, be-littling, a common insult, impolite, mocking, on the point of being mysoginistic, and a modified form of the original "lesbian" that implies a lack of respect.
Hardly. You are just making up bullshit because you don't have a rational reason. You are absolutely refusing you explain why it is all those things. Why is replacing that "-ian" with an "-o" disrespectful? Why is it a common insult? It's becoming increasingly clear that you do not have a good reason that isn't some form of logical fallacy.

I swear, people are so damn offended nowadays.

You refuse to accept that people are offended by belittling terms, you have repeatedly used your personal standard on what is and is not a diminutive, and demand an unreasonable degree of proof for them being offensive. You close your ears when confronted with accepted usage, claiming that it does not live up to your request, when accepted usage is what language IS.
Diminutive forms of address, when they are unwelcome, are sometimes impolite, sometimes annoying, and sometimes very insulting and offensive, boy.

Does being called "boy" offend? Tell me why, and make me a believer using your OWN standards of proof.

XaLEv · Post by **XaLEv** » 2003-08-03 06:04pm

Gil Hamilton wrote: Except personal space invasion is a specific thing. You shouldn't have said it in the first place if you just meant "makes one uncomfortable".

I assumed you could understand the concept of personal space and use that understanding to help you grasp the subject at hand. I was wrong.

You aren't able to post a good reason why it should. Concession accepted. Only stupid people get mad over something when they don't know why they are mad in the first place.

Why do you bother to ask questions if you cannot accept the answers? Offense is an emotional reaction. You can get a valid reason for why something is offensive within the context of emotion, but if you keep digging deeper into it you will always come back to the fact that emotion is irrational. Accept this or find something else to do.