Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (54359)	9/3/1999 1:03:00 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

IMO you confirmed my take on the use Neocon made of the "natural urges" argument, so I'll skip it. I think his reply was logically justified by the assertion it rebutted. <<<<Neo comported himself very well in the argument, and doesn't need defending, but of course you have a right to defend him if you think he needs it.>>>> Cobe, you're attributing to my mind the idea that Neo "needs" me to "defend him." That notion is a construct of yours. In mine, I was speaking my mind on an issue of fairness and of argumentation protocol. <<<<And he most certainly did say that breast-feeding in public is an example of loosening standards, explicitly, repeatedly. Which I don't think is tactful, and I do think is belligerent.>>>> If it feels to him like an example of loosening standards, whyever shouldn't he be allowed to say so without being called names? His is a view you and I disagree with. I, for one, think the increasing acceptance of public breast-feeding represents a rise in standards of rationality about the topic and a decrease in the subordination of women to patriarchal concepts. I don't think I am either tactless or belligerent for expressing that view, however much others may disagree with it. Cobe, my friend, I can't get it through my head why it's belligerent to express your feelings about something in a discussion forum. Particularly one called "Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!!" BTW, Neocon has to have known how his expression of his feelings would be received here. That's why I said I thought he showed courage in expressing his. <<< the dog-eating argument was made by Neo in response to my comment that "Americans are weird." Thus, I would say that in that context, Neo's dog-eating argument was an ineffective refutation of my comment that Americans are weird. The cultural argument was a side-show.>>> Your "Americans are weird" was understood by Neocon, me, and others, I am sure, to contain the message that other cultures are less weird than American culture. It didn't say, "Aren't people weird?" It said, "Americans are weird." It seems to me reasonable of Neocon to have offered the point, after you have raised the comparative-culture issue with that remark, that there are lots of things other cultures consider fine that we don't, dog-eating being one example. The cultural argument wasn't the side show, it was the only attraction. IMO.

To: Ilaine who wrote (54359)	9/3/1999 3:17:00 PM
From: Michael M	Respond to of 108807

CB -- call your favorite newspaper or TV station. There's a job waiting for you! Example: Neocon -- "Can I whip out the wang and pee as the spirit moves? After all that's what it was made for." CB's version of Neocon's remark -- "Pulling out my wang and urinating all over the restaurant is merely satisfaction of a natural urge, too." You DID say you were paraphrasing but using quote marks is kind of questionable when paraphrasing. In any case, Neocon didn't say boo about peeing all over the restaurant -- maybe he has some self-sealing little (no offense, Neo) baggie for storing the pee until he gets to a proper place for disposal.