OK. Almost everyone. You are correct. I apologize.
No need to apologize. I wasn't really insulted even though you charged me with being admiring of someone who has been labeled, among other things, a pervert, stalker, rapist, and, most recently, a sociopath. Now, ya gotta admit that that's at least as much of an insult as "being into sadistic porn." But I didn't feel insulted or angry at all. One of those different-strokes things. Just trying to illustrate.
It wasn't intentional? Was it line noise? His cat walked over the keyboard? Then why didn't he say so?
Of course the post was intentional. But I don't see how you can say for certain that the insult was intentional. He said in his "apology" that it was an attempted joke gone bad. Maybe it was. Maybe it wasn't. I don't know how you can say for sure that it wasn't. Gotta go with "alleged" on this one.
Not malicious? Huh? It was meant as a compliment? No malice?
The absence of malice isn't a compliment. There's a lot of room between malice and compliment. Malice is a passion for causing suffering with the insult. My suspicion is that he was trying to get her to wig out for his own entertainment and that the suffering was incidental. Nonetheless, I could go along with malice because the wigging out process would cause distress.
Grievous? Yeah, I'd say it was a pretty bad insult.
Again, there's a lot of room between "pretty bad" and grievous. "Grievous" is big-time bad, not pretty bad. When the ice dancing judges rate the first pair, they don't give them a ten no matter how wonderful they are. They have to leave some room for something even better to come along. If you call charging someone with being into kinky porn a grievous insult, what to you call ripping the clothes off women at a tailhook party or that Hispanic celebration in NY? What do you call humiliating someone in public? As I said earlier, I'll buy "insult" but I wouldn't buy "deeply insulting" and I certainly don't buy "grievous."
So, I'll give you "malicious" and "insult." For the rest, you'll need some new information or a fresh argument to convince me.
Gimme a break, Karen.
When I question you about your basis for a charge you do one of two things. You send me a stack of links as though your conclusions were intuitively obvious from those clips. The other is that you say "gimme a break" like I must be really dense not to see what you see. What you don't do is give me a roadmap of how you come to the conclusions you come to. If I don't intuitively come down where you do, how can I understand your point of view, let alone come around to accepting it?
I have never tried to persuade you to adopt my POV. All I have been trying to do is to demonstrate that someone could be skeptical about charges of stalking and perversion without being on Chris's "side." Since you, in your last post, you acknowledge that I'm not a member of Chris's fan club, perhaps I've made my point. Remember that because I may have cause to remind you in the future. <g> |
