[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A GNU “social contract”?

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: A GNU “social contract”?
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2019 23:31:30 +0100
User-agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)

Ruben Safir, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 16:06:04 -0400, a ecrit:
> On 10/28/19 2:41 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Jean Louis, le lun. 28 oct. 2019 21:54:00 +0530, a ecrit:
> >> Virgin joke is a joke
> > Now that I have read about it, I can definitely say that it is a
> > completely inappropriate "joke". Sure, it'll get a lot of people laugh.
> > But it'll also get some people not at ease / ashamed, etc., which is
> > just in line with that I wrote:
> No it wouldn't.  The implication of any reference to human sexuality is
> offensive and that is CRAP.

It is not a question of reference to human sexuality only. It is a
question of saying that a particular (non-)sexuality status is something
that shall be fixed, as if it was shameful. It's the fact that the joke
is based the assumption that the person at stake has a problem to be
fixed which is an issue. I remember a particularly hilarious talk that
was comparing writing software with having sex, and was thus _full_ of
sexual references, but didn't contain any question of shame, and thus at
worse could make some people go red, but not get offensed.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]