Honestly, it will be next December when I sing Christmas carols again :-)
> On Jan 22, 2016, at 12:34, Aahz Maruch via Callers > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016, via Callers wrote: >> >> I disagree. If it is fair to condemn a word despite widespread >> ignorance of its racist etymology (such as the very real problem >> with the verb "gyp"), then the inverse must be true: it is fair to >> exonerate a word despite widespread ignorance of its non-racist >> etymology (e.g., niggardly). That a word falsely gets attributed to >> a category in which it doesn't belong is irrelevant. If two separate >> meanings/derivations converge to an identically spelled modern word, >> I don't believe the innocent word (when used in its original context) >> deserves to be written off. Let us truly abide by what you claim to >> support: its current use *is* relevant. > > Let me know the next time you use "gay" to mean something roughly similar > to "happy" or "joyful", but for which there is no direct substitute. > Despite my support for queer rights (given that two of my partners are > bisexual, among other reasons), that's the one real loss I still feel. > -- > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ > <*> <*> <*> > Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
