From: hollowr@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (R. Holloway)
Newsgroups: pnw.personals
Subject: Re: ad
Summary: A Rose by any other name is still a rose.
Date: 14 Aug 92 02:44:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: leela.1992Aug14.024454.2102
Distribution: pnw
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University

In article <crystal.713755721@glia> crystal@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Crystal) writes:
>In <1992Aug13.125935.24650@cadreor.cadre.com> neil@cadreor.cadre.com (Neil W. Van Dyke) writes:
>
>>hollowr@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (R. Holloway) writes:
>>>In article <crystal.713679082@glia> crystal@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Crystal) writes:
>>>>In <1aiDPB2w165w@pdaxs.techbook.com> keith@pdaxs.techbook.com (Keith) writes:
>
>>>>> WANTED:  just for curiosity's sake, I would like to hear from you if you 
>>>>>are a young girl, age 19-20, who is sold out for Jesus.  [...]
>
>>>>"sold out to Jesus"???
>>>>
>>>>You want a NUN?!?!?!
>>>>
>>>>Kinky...
>
>>>IHMO, this is a cheap shot.  This person, BELIEVES, IN WHAT HE/SHE POSTED IN
>>>an ad.  Crystal, you've betrayed the spirit of this group.  You, at worst, are
>>>sexist, racist, & religiously prejudice.  This person, honestly expressesed,
>>>a preference defining his/her likes/dislikes, yet you've focused upon "sold on
>>>Jesus."  Why is this?  [...]
>>[25 more lines of flame from R. Holloway deleted.]
>
>>I think Crystal was pretty-much joking.  After a period of annoying postings
>>of gay-bashing, we could use some levity and playfulness.  Keith shouldn't feel
>>offended.  Take it easy.
>
>>Neil
>
>>-- 
>>Neil W. Van Dyke <> neil@cadre.com <> +1 503 690 1586 <> Fax: +1 503 690 1320
>>"My employer disclaims that I even work for them, much less speak for them."
>
>
>Thank you, Neil!
>
>Yes, it was a joke...a play on the phrase that I quoted.  I saw it as quite
>ambiguous and likely not at all what he intended to say.  My favorite form
>of humor is wordplay and I *adore* puns and double entendre (those who
>suffered through the p-nut butter thread may have noticed this...:> )
>
>I will not even bother to address R. Holloway, as he has made assumptions
>based on a misinterpretation.  I do not get into religious arguments. I
>stated my views ONCE, quite simply and intend to leave it at that.
>
>However...if someone tosses out a straight line...I just may pounce on it
>with an alternative *must likely ridiculous* interpretation that has abso       absolutely no correlation to my own view, opinions or lifestyle.
>
>Humor for humor's sake...
>
>Crystal
>  ;>
>
>"I enjoy life as a jester"  --Jimmy Buffett
>
Neil and Crystal:

I recall from somewhere, that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  It seems
to me, your criticism is motivated by something other than righteous indigna-
tion.  I felt honestly about what I wrote & stand by those feelings and
thoughts. You preceived crystal's comments as humerous.  I perceived them
as disparaging & racist.  I care less for our perceptions.  I've been involv-
ed in many criminal & civil cases (presonally & professionally) of racism and 
discrimination & it always starts with "humor" - the classic defense.  e.g.,
"I didn't mean to tell her her ass was gorgeous in a sexist or discriminatory 
way, your honor."  "I was just kidding around."  "I didn't mean to hurt anyone,
I was only following orders, mein heir."  Grow up, mate.  We are all judged 
NOT by our intentions: we are judged objectively by our by our words in print 
& orally.

It has been my experience & training that humor is predicate to prejudice,
discrimination & racism.  Racial, ethnic, religious intolerence is abhorant
to me any disguise.  What matters are my perceptions & not yours or crystal's
intentions.  That's it in a nutshell.  My intolerence is the same as though
she were to respond to a african american's post by calling him or her a
nigger. One person's meat is another's poison.  C'est la vie.

Warm regards,

R. Holloway
Newsgroups: pnw.personals