Klarinet Archive - Posting 000195.txt from 2005/11

From: William Kelly <kell0786@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] The Use of English
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 08:46:30 -0500

Matthew, you are confusing offensive language with offensive ideas. Yes to
the later, no to the former. I think this confusion is causing some
needless complication in the discussion. I think Bill's analysis is
accurate.
It may indeed be that "Sometimes there is no better word in the
language for a particular situation than a so called 'dirty word'." I doubt
this is the case, but nonetheless in our society there are places where
those things are either expressed without vulgarity or not at all. A place
such as this would be a good example.
At some basic philisophical level, Edward, your stoical comments about
nothing being offensive, rather it is only us that allow oursleves to be
offended, is indeed correct. I don't see this as being pertinent here, that
is to say, as a rationale for abandoning social norms. But I appreciate
your desire to use profanity judiciously, as opposed to gratuitously.

On 10 Nov 2005, Matthew Lloyd wrote:
> "I think the wise and courteous thing would be to make it a
> point to use language that is unlikely to offend ANY member of the
> group."
>
> Bill,
>
> If we did that, what a bland list this would be. Should we all start by
> saying what might offend us?
>
> Matthew.
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is a service of Woodwind.Org, Inc. http://www.woodwind.org