Brian Manning Delaney wrote:
> "Michael S. Lorrey" wrote:
> > I imagine, from the way you have conducted
> > yourself here, that you are the sort of person
> > who gives thanks every day for the fact that
> > duels are no longer legal means of settling
> > personal disputes of honor. If you conduct
> > yourself in your real interpersonal relations as
> > you have here, I would imagine that you would
> > not last long in such an environment.
> What a despicable thing to say. I conduct myself the same
> everywhere, and I've never been involved in any physical
> violence in my life.
> I have received death threats, however, which is part of why
> your comments are so chilling to me. You are saying, in effect,
> "this is someone whose behavior would be seen by many as worthy
> of death (or sufficient injury to no longer be 'lasting')."
> How insensitive, unproductive, and one-sided. If what you say is
> true, the people with such views are the ones in error.
Uh, no. Its people like you who think that you can pop off anything at
all, so long as you act like you are saying it in a good natured way, or
say 'cheerio, pip pip' at the end makes everything nice nice happy
happy. Your repeatedly skewed ideas about the world, like
anti-circumcision being the same as anti-semitism, which have not
logical basis in fact, as well as your assumption that the term 'a man's
wife' asserts some sort of property claim, indicates to me that you are
not playing with a full deck, or else you get some visceral, unadmitted
pleasure from insulting people and acting innocent about it...
> Worse still, is this (note that this sentence followed the
> previous, in the same paragraph):
> > The idea that you think you can so offhandedly
> > make personal aspersions about a mans wife
> > and expect no adverse repercussions just
> > boggles the mind.
> First, I did not expect no repercussions. Second, it was not
> offhanded. Finally, the property orientation towards Natasha is
> not one I had in the forefront of my mind. She's an independent
> human being who treated me badly, I did the same back. What's
> the big deal?
There is no property orientation involved, but this comment of yours is
exactly the sort of blind assumption you keep making in all of your
inane and insulting posts. You are operating off of some sort of
politically correct memeset that seems to look at anything anybody says
from a 90 degree angle from the rest of the rational universe.
> > If you wish to retain any place here, I would
> > emphatically suggest you make a sincere and full
> > apology to both Max and Natasha and let the
> > discussion drop at that.
> I'm the one owed apologies, by an increasing number of people
> (now you).
No, Brian, I owe you nothing.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:14:23 MDT