[lobstaboy]

Anybody read any Norman Spinrad?

[Bill McCarthy]

I don’t know about you but after reading this thread I’m all in a mucking fuddle. Isn’t life complicated at times.

[Propwash]

I actually didn't read this thread as being about sexual orientation, transition between genders or anything related. I actually have no strong views on any of that because I regard it as individually personal. I read it as being about the modern trend to indulge in verbal gymnastics in the hope that offence can be avoided to anyone reading/hearing what is said. That is an impossible task anyway because in today's world we seem to have bred individuals who are perpetually offended.

Interacting with other humans is a basic need and without it the species would never have evolved beyond its humble beginnings. If every word uttered has to be carefully weighed to ensure that it cannot be misconstrued or deliberately given a meaning that was not intended then worthwhile exchanges become much harder. The very concept of "hate speech" which is a very recent addition to our legislation, and, in England at least, hands the power of judgement on whether something said breaches that prohibition to any individual who hears it, even if not the person to whom the remark was directed, was a watershed moment for free speech. Legislation that protected people from deliberately offensive or insulting remarks where they may lead to a breach of the Peace already existed, but had sufficient safeguards that it didn't constrain the right to free speech, even if it unintentionally offended. Free speech, within traditionally understood limits, matters and should be protected not constrained. That includes the right, again within traditionally understood limits, to offend.

Sorry if that opinion offends anyone.

PW

[Leodisflyer]

Realised I missed a number of posts before putting up a comment myself. Those posts included information from two forumites who are among the best qualified to comment. Unsurprisingly @PeteSpencer added some knowledge that was new to me. FWIW I think the personal view and position he states is the best one to be extended to most of us. In the meantime I’ll continue to view people as people.

[Leodisflyer]

@Propwash doesn’t offend me. I took the original post in a similar way as being about language and I tried to make a similar comment about creating an issue, where one need not exist, through trying too hard. I

Don’t agree with everything you say as communication has a sender and a receiver. The receiver does not necessarily hear what us said. Everything we hear goes through a perception filter and is influenced by wider context and experiences. Language also changes, often rapidly. When sending we need to consider what the receiver might hear. In the modern world though we are, in effect, broadcasting rather than speaking to a known audience, and that is where the communication difficulties often start. This forum is interesting. There is a relatively small number of active contributors and, over time, they are broadly known to each other. It is though simultaneously public and I think most of us are conscious of that in wanting to explain thinking, Your pre-apology for any offence is, in my view, reflection of your understanding of a broad audience and also the complexity of communication. And my own apology to you in advance, aware from your posting history of your career and that communication will be a specialist subject for you.

As I said, I like the directness of the American language style. Face to face they have a talent for stripping out emotion words in such a way as you receive the message as direct and without sub-text. Deviate from that in a small way and you suddenly add in unintended meaning. Those, such as me, who don’t have such a direct style, include additional information to add context. You have to be one or the other in my view, especially online where body language is missing. I wish I could communicate in the natural American way, but I can’t. There are others here who do have that talent.

[lobstaboy]

(and talking of language, isn't it great that re-naming this sub-forum Help and Advice hasn't demolished the spirit of Non-Av?)

[stevelup]

I actually didn't read this thread as being about sexual orientation, transition between genders or anything related. I actually have no strong views on any of that because I regard it as individually personal. I read it as being about the modern trend to indulge in verbal gymnastics in the hope that offence can be avoided to anyone reading/hearing what is said. That is an impossible task anyway because in today's world we seem to have bred individuals who are perpetually offended.

Yes, that was exactly my reasoning in posting this - to engage this kind of debate - not to make any comment on the actual subject matter.

[Cessna571]

Personally I struggle with the whole thing but only because I find it so hard to know how I’m meant to react.

My whole life I’ve just taken people for what they are or what they want to be, tbh, I’m really not fussed how people want to identify etc until it impinges on other people and makes them feel uncomfortable.

The fear of offending someone or being strung up for getting anything wrong is my main concern, and so I just don’t get involved. ...


But, and here’s the but.. the hoops that everyone else had to jump through and the indignation if you forgot that week’s hoop. That was the problem.

There are obviously people to whom it is all a game, and it isn’t a hobby, it’s a serious matter.

Try to treat them with the love and respect they deserve.

I think removing the middle of a post to change the meaning of the post when you quote it is very disingenuous.

[TheFarmer]

Rather than fall out about who should or shouldn’t have a willy, why don’t you all go flying. It’s lovely up here.

[stevelup]

Annual

[GrahamB]

Rather than fall out about who should or shouldn’t have a willy, why don’t you all go flying. It’s lovely up here.

If someone hits you because you're head down in your phone while flying, you're gonna wish you had a BRS ...

[lobstaboy]

I think removing the middle of a post to change the meaning of the post when you quote it is very disingenuous.

I'm sorry. I absolutely didn't mean that. I don't like huge posts with long quotes so I left in the bits that I empathize with and feel are generally a problem for people, and I left out the parts that seemed individual to you because my reply was meant to be a general one.

So again, I'd say, give them the love and respect that they deserve

Depending on circumstances that might be a lot, or a little.

And I suppose I also mean don't overthink your behaviour. You need to be yourself, to be authentic (in the Existential sense). That's important for you and the folk you are talking to will recognise it.

(The "you" I'm talking about isn't necessarily Cessna571, it's anybody that might feel it's helpful. Alternatively you can dismiss me as being a fluffy bunny snowflake. I don't mind)

[stevelup]

Rather than fall out about who should or shouldn’t have a willy, why don’t you all go flying. It’s lovely up here.

If someone hits you because you're head down in your phone while flying, you're gonna wish you had a BRS ...

Real men don’t need no stinkin’ BRS

[PeteSpencer]

Rather than fall out about who should or shouldn’t have a willy, why don’t you all go flying. It’s lovely up here.

Put that willy away.................

Peter

[TheFarmer]

How do you know I don’t have a cervix?