you know...

I think I'm with Aaron on this one.

I'm turning off the spigot for a while.

My posts rarely get any responses and I am no longer learning anything here. It is just noise that keeps me from doing more important things like compose music.

And part of my frustration is illustrated by the people who got down on Carl for the use of the word "gay". I thought they were acting like the thought police. My 15 yro daughter uses that word in exactly the same context on a weekly if not daily basis.

Chris

   My girlfriend's baby Laila (still in the womb) didn't even move.  For usually any sort of music (including virtually all my micro-tonal music), she will move around (what can I say...she loves music).  Not giving my opinion on listening anymore...but I will say Laila gave it a thumbs down. :-P

--- On Sun, 6/12/11, christopherv <chrisvaisvil@...m> wrote:

From: christopherv <chrisvaisvil@...>
Subject: [tuning] you know...
To: tuning@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, June 12, 2011, 8:09 AM

I think I'm with Aaron on this one.

I'm turning off the spigot for a while.

My posts rarely get any responses and I am no longer learning anything here. It is just noise that keeps me from doing more important things like compose music.

And part of my frustration is illustrated by the people who got down on Carl for the use of the word "gay". I thought they were acting like the thought police. My 15 yro daughter uses that word in exactly the same context on a weekly if not daily basis.

Chris

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "christopherv" <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:

> And part of my frustration is illustrated by the people who got down on Carl for the use of the word "gay". I thought they were acting like the thought police. My 15 yro daughter uses that word in exactly the same context on a weekly if not daily basis.

When I was very young, we were chanting "Eeny meeny miny moe, catch a nigger by the toe" until our mom stopped us. The subsequent conversation was illuminating:

"What's a 'nigger'?"
"It means a Negro, a person with dark skin."
"What's wrong with that?"
"There's nothing wrong with that."
"Then why can't we say it?"
"People don't like being called that."

I don't think my mom was being a thought policewoman. It's a part of growing up to learn that something might be offensive.

As Carl pointed out in his defense the word gay has multiple meanings. AFAIK that doesn't apply to your example. And as far as I can remember there was nothing in the context of Carl's post to imply that he was putting down someone's personal sexual preference. At least I know that is certainly not the case with my daughter who has many "gay" friends including a 14 year old boy who carries a purse but uses the term "gay" in the same sense as Carl did.

I can certainly agree with not purposefully hurting people. (Such as the post Michael S. made about my music) However, there is a difference when you start talking about words with multiple meanings that change due to context.

This forum is divisive enough without picking nits that have nothing to do with the subject at hand. And I have to admit - even I engaged in that today because I responded inappropriately to a post that had nothing to do with what I was upset about.

For that I apologize.

Chris

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "christopherv" <chrisvaisvil@> wrote:
>
> > And part of my frustration is illustrated by the people who got down on Carl for the use of the word "gay". I thought they were acting like the thought police. My 15 yro daughter uses that word in exactly the same context on a weekly if not daily basis.
>
> When I was very young, we were chanting "Eeny meeny miny moe, catch a nigger by the toe" until our mom stopped us. The subsequent conversation was illuminating:
>
> "What's a 'nigger'?"
> "It means a Negro, a person with dark skin."
> "What's wrong with that?"
> "There's nothing wrong with that."
> "Then why can't we say it?"
> "People don't like being called that."
>
> I don't think my mom was being a thought policewoman. It's a part of growing up to learn that something might be offensive.
>

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "christopherv" <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> As Carl pointed out in his defense the word gay has multiple meanings. AFAIK that doesn't apply to your example.

The point of my example was that sometimes people don't like things, and kids might not always be the best judges in such cases. Still, linguistic change is in good measure driven generationally. Maybe the new meaning for "gay" will win, and maybe it won't. It hasn't yet; it's still youth slang, and some people don't like it. Some people are certainly going to continue to dislike it so long as "gay" also carries the mean of "homosexual". No need to make so big a deal out of
pointing out something which is, after all, pretty obvious.

About the term "Gay" >"No need to make so big a deal out of pointing out something which is, after all, pretty obvious."

      Same thing goes for the term "Retarded"...which I (even, as an autistic) don't care about unless I also see someone's busting my nuts by saying "oh well...I'm not even going to listen to your side of the story...because I already know it's weak and wrong because you're a retard".
  What's far worse still...is trying to belittle someone by being passive aggressive IE "I'm sorry you have such a tough time expressing even basic thoughts...perhaps you should read a book on fifth grade English."  It insults them in context plus insults them for hoping they will be too dumb to understand their statement as an insult.

    The point being the individual words you use alone mean almost nothing...and the context you use them in means everything: the context being nasty and the words being nice is actually the most insulting...at least someone using nasty words (even in nasty contexts) can be
given some credit for being genuine.  Now is that f-cking amazing or what?  :-D

The argument made was that it was intended to mean "merry; keenly excited".
I think if it had been said, "That's merry", an entirely different picture
would have been conveyed, thus that actual statement (the one actually made)
fails in my view,

On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 8:22 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@...> wrote:

>
>
> About the term "Gay" >"No need to make so big a deal out of pointing out
> something which is, after all, pretty obvious."
>
> Same thing goes for the term "Retarded"...which I (even, as an
> autistic) don't care about unless I also see someone's busting my nuts by
> saying "oh well...I'm not even going to listen to your side of the
> story...because I already know it's weak and wrong because you're a retard".
> What's far worse still...is trying to belittle someone by being passive
> aggressive IE "I'm sorry you have such a tough time expressing even basic
> thoughts...perhaps you should read a book on fifth grade English." It
> insults them in context plus insults them for hoping they will be too dumb
> to understand their statement as an insult.
>
> The point being the individual words you use alone mean almost
> nothing...and the context you use them in means everything: the context
> being nasty and the words being nice is actually the most insulting...at
> least someone using nasty words (even in nasty contexts) can be
> given some credit for being genuine. Now is that f-cking amazing or what?
> :-D
>
>
>

Daniel>"The argument made was that it was intended to mean "merry; keenly excited"."

   Which is the gay = happy meaning that so people still use.  I had a teacher named Mr. Gay (no joke!) who said "please...gay means happy...nothing else..I have a wife". :-D   So yes, sounds like the context was not a bad one...unless sarcasm was implied.  Why should it be such an issue, then?  I'd argue...we drop this whole issue...what good is "tackling" it doing us.

Sure, no skin there, but I just wanted to point out that what actually put
me "on a side" of this little thing was an argument that didn't seem to make
sense.

__

On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Michael <djtrancendance@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
> Daniel>"The argument made was that it was intended to mean "merry; keenly
> excited"."
>
> Which is the gay = happy meaning that so people still use. I had a
> teacher named Mr. Gay (no joke!) who said "please...gay means
> happy...nothing else..I have a wife". :-D So yes, sounds like the context
> was not a bad one...unless sarcasm was implied. Why should it be such an
> issue, then? I'd argue...we drop this whole issue...what good is "tackling"
> it doing us.
>
>
>

On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 6:42 PM, christopherv <chrisvaisvil@...> wrote:
>
> As Carl pointed out in his defense the word gay has multiple meanings. AFAIK that doesn't apply to your example. And as far as I can remember there was nothing in the context of Carl's post to imply that he was putting down someone's personal sexual preference. At least I know that is certainly not the case with my daughter who has many "gay" friends including a 14 year old boy who carries a purse but uses the term "gay" in the same sense as Carl did.

FWIW, the South Park episode on the word "fag" pretty much sums up all
of my thoughts on the issue, where it was discovered that all of the
kids in South Park unanimously thought that the word "fag" actually
referred to obnoxious Harley riders, not gay people. So they tried to
get the dictionary changed in accordance with the meaning of the word
as used in common usage. In fact, I think it would be pretty groovy if
we could get that change enacted in real life sometimes.

It's like my uncle out in LA, who has a collection of blackface
minstrelsy-inspired stuff around his house, salt and pepper shakers
and all that. I went out there a few summers ago and asked about it,
because I only knew of that stuff as an obvious and overtly racist
characterization of black people that I thought went out of style half
a century ago. He said that it didn't have anything to do with black
people, that it was just a nice, cartoon-ish character from his youth,
and that "obnoxious liberals" as he put it were basically trying to
encroach on happy memories from his childhood. etc.

That being said, I still choose to not use that word, unless I'm in a
group of people where I know its meaning is going to be interpreted
like "hey, your choice of slang reminds me of being a harmless and
innocent little kid" and not "hey, your choice of slang unfortunately
reminds me of being a gay kid in a straight world." Perhaps Carl's
posting it here was an overassumption on his part that everyone would
interpret the word closer to the former sense, or would forgive any
unfortunate associations arising from the latter sense. But in
reality, there's no issue, because Carl's gambit was right - we all
know that Carl doesn't really hate gay people, so life will go on
without any real grief coming out of it.

-Mike

>   What's far worse still...is trying to belittle someone by being passive aggressive IE "I'm sorry you have such a tough time expressing even basic thoughts...perhaps you should read a book on fifth grade English."  It insults them in context plus insults them for hoping they will be too dumb to understand their statement as an insult.

I too have always found witty insults to be the most degrading. Words like "gay," "retarded" and "redneck" are only insulting depending on the context.

What is most ridiculous is when the word "gay" is called a homophobic insult. Have people forgotten the definition of homophobic? Even wikipedia seems to have forgotten the original definition.

-Ryan

--- "genewardsmith" <genewardsmith@...> wrote:

> When I was very young, we were chanting "Eeny meeny miny moe,
> catch a nigger by the toe" until our mom stopped us. The
> subsequent conversation was illuminating:

I can't believe you pulled out this bogus analogy despite
my explanation.

Communication is a two-way street. Deal with it. We know
what kind of PC nightmare obtains when this simple fact
is forgotten.

-Carl