Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:17:43 11/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 2000 at 12:26:01, Ratko V Tomic wrote: >>>> It can be taken as a reference to child abuse. >>> >>> By whom? A mechanical translator from English to Russian? >> >> By anybody that can read the English language. > >So when you hear, say, that Britney Spears is a flash >in a pan, you understand that the subject of conversation >is physical properties of hot pans with flashes in them? No. That metaphor has _no_ direct reference to child abuse. There are lots of metaphors that are somewhat vulgar, but that is their only offensive quality. One my Navy friend uses often is "has the personality of a bent shit-can lid." But the "beat it like a red-headed stepchild" tends to make a bit of humor about a subject that is not humerous in the least, at least to the folks that complained. > >What you, or whoever whined to you via email, is _really_ >objecting to is the plain factual observation behind the >metaphor, that on average the step-children _are_ abused >by their step-parents much more than are the children by >their natural parents. Like it or not, that's the way >things are. Just as with pans and flashes, the plain >facts are that flashes don't last very long. At least >it works so down here on real earth, below the high up in >the clouds ivory towers of academia (or Hollywood), far >away from their PeeCee speech codes and thought police. This is a matter of personal judgement and taste. If you want to tell me that I have the personality of a bent shit-can lid, that might be a bit insulting to me directly, but it doesn't have any sort of other implication. IE no racism. No bigotry. no religion. etc. child abuse is serious to many. I see no reason why that particular metaphor can't simply be dropped, and another substituted. > >Obviously, some folks do not wish to be reminded of these >plain facts (and many others like that), since they wish to >convince the kids that all kinds of families are equally >fine (as I relized by looking at my kids' "education," e.g. >the "celebration" of the "gay month" at my kids' school, here >in the People's Republik of Massachusetts), that traditional >family which sticks together is no better than a "family" >with two mommies or three daddies or with four times re-married >couple, each with several kids from earlier marriagies. They >are all supposed to be equally fine "alternative lifestyles." If you want to talk about chess engines playing each other, and at the same time make a political statement about child abuse and hypocritical opinions, that metaphor might work. But since this is not the place to start a child abuse or family rights discussion, the metaphor doesn't belong... > >Of course, everyone (with his head outside the pink cloud) >knows they aren't, but PeeCee dogma holds they are, and so >you moderate when someone uses a metaphor reminding you (or >whomever that whined about it via email) that it ain't so >in the real world, but you don't moderate when someone >reminds you of facts about flashes in the pan or anything >else not contradicting the PeeCee dogmas. 'flash in the pan' is a metaphor for short-lived. Nothing racial, abusive, political, is implied. The _other_ metaphor can't pass that test.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.