Re: [photo-3d] Re: HOT CHICK . . . .

["John A. Rupkalvis" <stereoscope@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Hershel Saylor" <saylor@xxxxxxx>
To: <photo-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2001 3:38 PM
Subject: Re: [photo-3d] Re: HOT CHICK . . . .


> I am generally not considered an idiot and I found the wording offensive.

How would you prefer to be considered for not seeing the obvious satire in
what is obviously a play on words?

> Would that title have been proper to put in a grade school yearbook or
> on a church bulletin?

Why not?  I suppose children who have pets of these types of animals must
find something else to call them?  I have seen both words used in children's
books, even for preschoolers.  What about the nursery rhyme about the "Owl
and the P****cat"?
(I guess that I can say "Owl", or is that bird on the forbidden list also?).

> I only found it offensive because of where it was
> found.  I consider this mail list to be a decent place where my young
> daughters
> can read the mail over my shoulder.

A good reason as to why everyone should observe reasonable discrection in
how they present material if it is likely to be misinterpreted.  This
discretion should be voluntary (which is the most effective way).

> I have received XXX rated spam
> that did not try to catch my attention with nearly such sensational
subject
> lines.
>
> I am not attempting to say that it should not have happened, only that
> I felt that my sensibilities had been offended.  In today world where
> the pressure is to be "politically correct"  too many people expect the
> world to conform to their views. I don't.  I too would have enjoyed the
> subject line had it been in a place where I would expect that type of
> wording.
>
>                                      Hershel

Very thoughtful and very well stated.  Certainly not the words of an idiot.
I get the impression that you were not as offended as you were surprised and
embarrassed to see this turn up where it was not expected.

Under the circumstances, with someone (especially a young child) looking
over my shoulder, I would also have been surprised and embarrassed.
However, if the child were old enough to read, and old enough to understand
the connotation value of the words being expressed in an unexpected context,
I would have also regarded it as an opportunity.  The opportunity would have
been to use this as an object lesson to the child, who could not always be
expected to be in situations of total parental control.

A talk about values (stated in terms appropriate to the age and maturity
level) and the dangers of being suddenly and unexpectedly thrust into a
situation that was at the very least, inappropriate, would be very good.

If it had been myself, I would even have admitted to my personal
embarrassment at the situation, so that the child would know that I was
uncomfortable and did not feel that this was something to be considered
appropriate.

I would also ask the child if he or she was offended by it.  A younger
child, wanting to please the parent, would probably say yes.  An older child
might say no.  Either way, I would point out that there are many valid
reasons for being offended by something, such as untrue statements.

I would also point out that satirical language, by itself, is rarely a good
reason for being offended.  I would also ask if there was any part of what I
said that was not completely understood, and attempt to clarify any such
points.  A child should never be left wondering how to deal with such
circumstances, because sooner or later (and a lot sooner than most parents
would like) similar situations WILL come up among their peers.  In spite of
the fact that it is embarrassing, it is much better for it to come up in the
presence of a parent, who can turn this into a positive learning experience.

Now, let's get back to discussing 3-D.

JR


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/