(04-28-2020 06:35 PM)mrbig Wrote:  

(04-28-2020 02:05 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-27-2020 08:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  Better, but why do we need labels at all when we understand the relationship? Why not just stick to Kamala or Senator Harris?

Only responding to this quote because it is among the more succinct... and of course I know you know this part....

For the same reason why some people would label Trump as Xenophobic or Racist or misogynist or whatever... or why a rain shower might be referred to as pummeling or gentle. Adjectives serve a purpose.

I say it because for some reason it seems perfectly acceptable to call Trump (and many other men) a misogynist or racist... or even a rapist if you believe it to be true, even if a court had not determined it to be so... but it's a problem to call a woman a slut? I get that it IS this way... and I certainly get that generically calling any race, gender, class of people by one such word is generally risky... even though I say/agree that 'men are (generally) pigs/dogs' all the time and don't get offended when others say that, as long as they accept that some may be an exception...

but it shouldn't be so just because one group has decided that they don't like being called bad names... and the other group isn't as offended or has been told they can't be as offended. I mean, #'s calling Kamala a slut is meant no more offensively than Kamala calling Trump a 'Sex Predator' in an ad during her presidential run.

"I prosecuted sex predators. Trump is one."

Less directly (that I'm aware of) she called justice Kavanaugh a rapist


I get the point made by you and others... and towards people on this forum I think it should generally apply (though none of us are above losing our cool)... but that's just not how it is today in politics nor how it has been for a few decades. If Kamala doesn't want people referring to her (alleged) rise to power using sex as a tool, then she shouldn't refer to others as 'predators' or 'rapists' in the criminal context with nothing but a similar allegation.

To me, the question is whether the demeaning term really demeans a whole bunch of people, not just the singular target. Mocking Bailiff or Abrams for their weight can e genuinely hurtful to anyone who is overweight. Calling Harris a slut can be hurtful to any woman who has been attacked for her sexuality. Calling Trump some of the words you suggest doesn’t target a group of people in the same way.

Calling Stretch is what level of demeaning to what group? The 'made it straight into the movie "Day of the Dead" as a zombie without an interview' type?

Sorry that answer above is nebulous. Using that 'protocol' there should never be any mockery ever, at all. One can wave their hands and say 'well the population of people who have eyes that look like catfish is well beyond twenty, so "Catfish Eyes" is completely and at all times utterly unacceptable.'