Well, I didn't ask what you'd do about them, I asked what you'd make of them. It sounds to me like you'd regard them as pretty sick. That was precisely my point.snotjello wrote:I think obsession about anything is unhealthy for a person, but it's none of my business, unless of course their obsession is to harm me. It may be distasteful to me and it might cause me to avoid their company, but that's my choice. If there are going to be people with such fascinations, I'd much rather them wear the t-shirt so I know who they are.Wombat wrote:Seriously, what would you make of someone who watched the Chaplin movie every day? What do you make of people who fill their houses with Nazi memorabilia?
You seem to be suggesting, though, that what makes them sick is their obsessiveness rather than the particular content of their obsession. I don't accept that. I don't see any harm in collecting model trains, or barbed wire (yes, people do) or whistles. I am not so happy about people obsessed with Nazi memorabillia. But I didn't say I'd want to ban it or act against them. I might not shun them for that alone; I might be curious to know what was behind the obsession.
Since nobody here is using, let alone abusing, the emoticons in question, the issue of how you or I would treat them hasn't yet arisen.
If you don't want me butting in telling collectors of Nazi memorabillia they are sick, what business have you telling Jews and others offended by the emoticons that they are too thin skinned and prescribing a remedy? Also, if you don't think that ethnic stereotyping and abuse could be part of the life of this board, check out a thread a couple of years ago on travellors, a clan from which I'm also descended. There have been other isolated incidents when Native Americans have been stereotyped and gratuitously insulted. You would also notice that all of us (who were targets by implication) replied with considerably more self control and restraint than those doing the stereotyping. So, I'm not saying that you might not have a point about strategies in the passage I quoted—I think you do—I'm just saying that you're not being consistent.snotjello wrote:Maybe a little desensitization can be a good thing; it thickens the skin. I don't believe, however, that it necessarily dulls the wits. I'd rather not be the kind who trembles every time something displeases me, because to appear undaunted (or even not to notice) can be the most frustrating thing to an offender.Wombat wrote:I think this joke would have been funny enough for about a fortnight but after that it runs the risk of normalising something we shouldn't think of that way.
In any event, you did take me somewhat out of context. I made it clear that I wasn't advocating anything more than self censorship and that I accept that Rich makes the rules around here. I simply thought that several people were missing the point of Paul's objection and I still do.
