Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

boston bean

(36,941 posts)

14. I don't know why you would take it personally...

Reply to RobertEarl (Reply #13)

Sun Jun 7, 2015, 05:59 AM

Jun 2015

You most certainly did say, we ought to ignore it because people make mistakes... And it was in the lines of your purity comment... Why would you try to limit what others say about bigotry?

On another note of interest concerning our little conversation here.... if we were to use your reasoning, why are you upset about something typed out on the internet. It's just words right? My words seem offensive to you...

I'm sorry, but using the word bigotry or describing acceptance thereof, is not offensive but using bigoted/racist/homophobic/misogynistic slurs... Those slurs are used for a purpose and not by "mistake". So, I'm not following your line very well, because it's becoming muddled. You want to the right to be offended by my saying you want a different type of purity where bigotry is accepted because people make mistakes, yet you don't feel others can be offended and should be able to voice it.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

58 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 OP

Thanks for warning our tender ears. We shall forever be grateful. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #1

Thanks for that little slice of SPY NBachers Jun 2015 #2

Thanks for the PSA Unknown Beatle Jun 2015 #3

I find it interesting that it is your side on this who keep carping on vapors and fainting CTyankee Jun 2015 #21

What sides are there on this? A vast majority of the people on this planet, let alone in this sabrina 1 Jun 2015 #35

My comment was on the use of the poster to indicate that something was going on with CTyankee Jun 2015 #36

Well, I don't think it's about sides. I think it's about a small group trying to force everyone else sabrina 1 Jun 2015 #40

I will not personally attack you. CTyankee Jun 2015 #44

Thank you for a civil response. And yes we can have those discussions and we do, but not on DU sabrina 1 Jun 2015 #56

If it bothers you to avoid using bigoted speech BainsBane Jun 2015 #4

Yes. F4lconF16 Jun 2015 #6

Eh? RobertEarl Jun 2015 #7

One little word. F4lconF16 Jun 2015 #9

So... RobertEarl Jun 2015 #10

You seem to want some type of purity... boston bean Jun 2015 #12

Saying something is fine RobertEarl Jun 2015 #13

I don't know why you would take it personally... boston bean Jun 2015 #14

Sorry, but strikes me funny that someone objecting to word censoring uses "frigging" pinboy3niner Jun 2015 #15

the reference to 'some man' is very insulting to me. samsingh Jun 2015 #28

In which post do you see "some man"? nt pinboy3niner Jun 2015 #29

More sexist than a single word is the misuse of the word 'misogyny' which is thrown around here sabrina 1 Jun 2015 #38

+1000 blue neen Jun 2015 #8

Strange thing is the OP is certainly concerned with words on DU. boston bean Jun 2015 #11

Exactly. Thank you. whathehell Jun 2015 #34

Post removed Post removed Jun 2015 #48

Thank you, BainsBane. brer cat Jun 2015 #16

Thank you gaspee Jun 2015 #20

"They're only words. It's the context that counts" diamondhead Jun 2015 #22

Great post and spot on. nt sufrommich Jun 2015 #27

Thank you. You are correct. whathehell Jun 2015 #31

Your well-reasoned and superbly written post will soon be defined as "bullying." alcibiades_mystery Jun 2015 #45

It is not bullying nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 #49

I'm not easily offended alcibiades_mystery Jun 2015 #58

Long screed for a word on a script nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 #47

Takes a lot to offend me. joshcryer Jun 2015 #5

the problem with your argument is this justiceischeap Jun 2015 #17

This ^^^^ Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jun 2015 #18

It is alsO your choice here nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 #51

I laughed at that too Blue_Adept Jun 2015 #19

Do you know the word 'context'? You are a poster who touts the bigoted Pope Francis Bluenorthwest Jun 2015 #23

If you don't like DU, leave forever. Again. randome Jun 2015 #24

+100 nt whathehell Jun 2015 #32

Jury results Blue_Adept Jun 2015 #41

Sure, let's all sit back and enjoy the condescension. randome Jun 2015 #43

Whatever kid nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 #54

This isn't a movie.It's a forum for democrats. One of the sufrommich Jun 2015 #25

ROFL malaise Jun 2015 #26

Context makes a difference. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #30

Context is everything as far as I'm concerned... Violet_Crumble Jun 2015 #37

Isn't that like saying don't read "To Kill a Mockingbird" if you don't like the n-word? Nye Bevan Jun 2015 #33

There are people who indeed do not read books with nasty language nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 #52

if you want to post "clinton is a bigot word", just google quote & you'll see several websites Sunlei Jun 2015 #39

Your post reminded me of a friend's aunt visiting from the U.K. LiberalElite Jun 2015 #42

Context matters, and US English is not the same as UK English. NuclearDem Jun 2015 #46

Which was the point of that exchange in the movie nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 #53

It's like you don't get the difference between wordplay and slurs. Brickbat Jun 2015 #50

It is more like a game of tribes quite honestly nadinbrzezinski Jun 2015 #55

No it isn't pintobean Jun 2015 #57