General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: On the evolution of language and the "W" word [View all]AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)One is a subset of the other. The smear by the 160-post newbie applies to the subset not the superset.
So yes, the analogy is spurious. If the newbie said 'public w-' or 'publicity w-' sure. Your analogy would make more sense. University President is not a political position. Depending on the university, he or she may be a state employee, but it is not a position of governance over the state. Has zip to do with being a well known female person in public life. It would make no more sense to call Kim Kardashian by that insult.
Now, ridiculous technicalities aside, we don't disagree that it was an inappropriate smear, or what should happen to that poster as a result. Skinner disagreed with us, called it deplorable (paraphrase) but not ban-able. I'd have banned him or her. Where you and I part ways is in your wild threshings about how much of Sander's support agrees with or 'defends' that noob. Or with the many mad posts now about how 'now it's ok to call X, Y' bullshit extrapolations. It's not. The sky is not falling. DU is not rotten to the core. We did what we could, the term has some relevance to American politics however distasteful and unwelcome here, but the admins didn't find it ban-worthy. Get over it. Let's move on. We don't even know what that poster's motives were, we could be wasting time burning good will right now, by design, and that makes us suckers.
Lets move on to policy, material issues. Someone calls Hillary a misogynistic term, I'll race you to the alert button, ok?