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.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (41481)	4/30/2004 8:40:24 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793896

Really Karen, the condescension in that article was dripping at times. We have a guy who eats grits. When I lived in the south, I discovered grits and continued to eat them until I got health conscious about my food in middle age. Guess this guy isn't health conscious. We have a guy who eschews the chi-chi bean-grinding of the trendy and foppish blues. We have a guy who's either not concerned with the environment, or not willing to pay extra for it, or who doesn't think that bleaching filters makes much of a difference to the environment, or who is not concerned about what his blue friends, if he has any, would say if they saw his white filters. Where is the condescension in any of that? If anything, the bit about the coffee is favorable, from my POV. The others are neutral. I was discussing this with a friend the other day who made the point that condescension may be in the views of the reader, not in the report, itself, which is quite matter of fact, we thought. She and I both disapproved of the blue family's willingness to spend $8K for an engagement ring and $30K for a wedding. So we could easily say that the author was looking down his nose at the blue family in reporting that when it was really she and I who were doing so. Similarly, I posted earlier about the red guy getting all his news from similarly biased sources and thinking he was informed. I look down on people who take pride in or are accepting of willful ignorance. So I could say that the author was condescending in reporting that tidbit. But it would be my condescension, not the author's. Those were the only two reported aspects of these families that I viewed as unfavorable. The rest of them were just different, interesting, not favorable or unfavorable, just neutral facts. I don't see eating grits as unfavorable, plus I know how they are served--fried in butter and congealed--so I don't see reporting Mr. Red's consuming them as condescending. I think she had a good point. It could also be that people see what they believe. If you expect condescension, then you find it. What did you think of the write-up of the blue family?