Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site randvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!randvax!edhall
From: edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: more on semantics
Message-ID: <2369@randvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 29-Mar-85 02:19:12 EST
Article-I.D.: randvax.2369
Posted: Fri Mar 29 02:19:12 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 31-Mar-85 03:38:29 EST
References: <1333@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: Rand Corp., Santa Monica
Lines: 32

> >> Enough! Enough!
> >> 
> >> It really shouldn't matter what words I use, as long as they're not
> >> explicitly derogatory and I don't mean it in a derogatory sense (one
> >> should be able to tell from context). So lighten up, already!
> >> -- 
> >> andy beals
> >> bandy@{lll-crg,mit-mc}.arpa	{sun!lll-crg,ihnp4!mit-eddie}!bandy
> 
> >These reactions sound a lot like what many southern whites would have
> >said about the practice of calling a black man ``boy''.
> 
> Sorry, but don't you think you're stretching it a little? 
> 

In a word, ``no''.

> Oh, I get it, because you overreact to an innocent word, that makes me
> self-centered. Thanks for the innovative viewpoint. 

No.  You are behaving in a self-centered way because you demand that
others look at the situation entirely from your own perspective, which
you claim is correct merely because you claim ``innocent'' intentions.

> Anyway, who is "us" and "we" ????

Me, and my Teddy Bear.  And anyone else who'd like to join us.

> 						Seth Jackson

		-Ed Hall
		decvax!randvax!edhall