Language, Intent, Offense [WARNING: ADULT discussion of specific, graphic words

Let's have a conversation. Try to stay with me for a little while, people, instead of careening off into funny but psychotic episodes.

I've shortened the time-out on Haskins and Greg. They're both fully reinstated as of right now. I've also permanently banned Nicegrrl. I've done these things for a variety of reasons.

1. There is a difference between the specific language you use, and the intent with which you use it. That doesn't mean they're unrelated--but they aren't the same thing. I don't believe either William or Greg is inherently misogynistic--that is, while I don't believe the intent behind the language in the thread in question was particularly misogynistic--the language they chose was.

Correspondence with a couple of different board members--who did NOT, by the way, ask me to reconsider imposing limbo--have convinced me that the difference between language chosen in the heat of the moment, and actual intent to wound with that language, is great enough to take it into account.

Now, they were still pretty rude to each other, and that's why the time-out in the first place: the respect your fellow-writer thing. Which I stand by. I sorta missed having 'em around, though. So I shortened it. Which is really sort of arbitrary, and while I could try to think of a good reason, I'll spare you.

I'm deeply troubled that it's considered insulting to imply that a man is in any way woman-like. That's indicative of a deeper cultural issue, though, and I don't think it's completely fair to hang the whole weight of that on any one guy. It's also interesting to realize that one of the worst things a woman can call a man, to insult him, is a dick or an asshole. Sexualized insults are weird.

2. Nicegrrl is leaving us permanently and involuntarily. After a review of her post history, I'm unconvinced she's interested in anything but upsetting and insulting people, just for the sake of stirring up shit. I'm not going to change my mind about that. I've thought about it for a couple of days.

I'm not interested in having anyone in this community who is primarily motivated by being disruptive and divisive just for the sake of getting attention--and for all practical intents and purposes, is apparently completely uncaring about the greater good of the community, as a whole.

I think that's really all I had to say. I'll yield the floor, if we need to talk about it some more.

But then we're assigning empirical bottom lines to a select combination of words. I believe that language and intent is way too fluid for that. I also believe that as devotees of language, it is our responsibility, privilege and joy to find what was said, not only in our own offerings, but in those of others.

Preconceived ramifications of hotbutton words and terms throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Click to expand...

Perks, I think that's a valid opinion, and I think one can make an argument for it--even though I don't necessarily agree. That's why we're having the discussion.