Somehow your post seems to imply that it is way worse to use a word “offensive to a minority” than it is to be physically assaulted by an offended listener?

That is so wrong on so many levels, I hardly know where to begin.

Certainly people have the right to be “offended;” even if the offense was not aimed at them personally. They do NOT have the right to assault people whose speech patterns do not conform to their liking. When did you not learn that?

How completely sad.

Unless you really meant to call people on this board whores, which wouldn’t surprise me. You’d lose then too, of course.

Just as an added observation, the post in which you initially used the contested word was also poorly written to the point of being almost incomprehensible. That might also be why quite a few people didn’t know where you were coming from with your weird skank-attack on Britney Spears.

“Maybe you and your co-scrubbers can get together and start a blog no-one reads. Should anyone stumble on it, you can while away your time removing any accidentally interesting or correct content from the comments in the belief people keep you at a huge distance out of a sense of awe.”

The only sense of self-importance I see here is coming from you. Out of this entire discussion, only your comments were interesting or noteworthy? Fascinating.

I could have missed it, but I don’t believe that anyone *demanded* that you recant anything. Your decision to use a word that has long been used as a shaming device for women was criticized, nothing more. You are the one who is overreacting here.

I find it interesting that you chose to quote only the final paragraph of Warren’s very eloquent response to you, and further chose to attack him personally when no one here has attacked you on such a level, and then announce that you’ve somehow “won.” As I said above, just as you are free to choose the words you use, others are free to use their own words to critique you. Your final response was outrageously rude when no one here stooped to that level when speaking to you.

When someone who disagrees with you and speaks his or her mind, it doesn’t mean you are being censored.

As for the Apology, it made me grumble too. I think it bugs me because not only does it tell girls that they’re doing something horribly wrong if they’re anything but pure virgins, but it also tells women that the most important thing about them is whether or not they’re using their bodies in the approved way. And if they’re NOT. Well! Time to make sure everyone knows how very, very sorry you are for making them have to tsk about it.

I’m done with the skank discussion, and I apologize again to Amanda, and anyone else who’s made it this far, for helping to turn a cogent post into a driveling maunder on the meanings of words.

Wow … too bad it took your helium filled head this long to deflate and float back to earth.

Here’s a simple way to avoid creating clutter with your burning need to correct what doesn’t need correcting — and this holds for your fellow uncorrectors — is not to barf up posts demanding that people “recant” actually correct information, like some pretentious douchebag talking out of his depth.

Possibly, when someone answers your question more politely than it was phrased. Maybe learn something and not strut around so much like a jerk and pretend you were wronged when someone gives you more than the time of day had that been asked with the same tone.

Mostly, dropping this notion that your being an asshole here is correcting social injustice, instructing people in manners, or that you were compelled to waste bandwidth by anything more than your inflated self importance would also help in your cause.

I doubt that you speak for the comments section or any of the main bloggers here, but I can believe why leading a couple of co-scrubbers might have contributed to your misguided sense of self-importance. I think that about covers it.

No, I don’t care to take this to email; you were the one demanding — LMAO! — that I RECANT my use of “skank” remember?

Maybe you and your co-scrubbers can get together and start a blog no-one reads. Should anyone stumble on it, you can while away your time removing any accidentally interesting or correct content from the comments in the belief people keep you at a huge distance out of a sense of awe.

Warren
September 10, 2007 at 11:41 am

This weekend I spotted one of those “chastity vow” type tee-shirts that said something to the effect of You have the Right to Remain Virtuous.

That really annoyed me… it might be worthwhile to parodize the “chastity” movement with … subversive countermessages.

I’ve seen few shirt messages that more succinctly summarized liberated, responsible, sex-positive messages than one I saw on an African-American young woman when I was back in junior high and on summer vacation up in the Smoky Mountains, back in the late ’70s; it said:

“Yes I Do, But Not With You.”

More like this please!