I guess I would say that when you think someone is using a double standard by deliberately misinterpreting a definition, the thing to do is point that out and correct them. I know the temptation is always to jump on the first opportunity to use that same double standard against the originator(s), but ultimately when you do that you legitimatize the use of the double standard. Then it just becomes the standard and the correct meaning gets lost.
Of course I'm the guy who still goes on a rant every time I see the word "tragedy" misused to mean "something bad" ( a daily occurrence)......
Tell me, just how do you feel I was deliberately misinterpreting a definition?
I said ,"You are right, it isn't relevant to any issues at hand and the only reason it made the news is because it was a sexists(
wouldn't that be sexism?) comment. Gillibrand may have actually liked being
demeaned (
should have used insulted)in that manner, I don't know."
Seems to me the only gray area here is on opinion of, if this was demeaning(
derogatory ) or not. Some say it is, others say it isn't. Obviously, based on Moreluck's OP on here she thought it to be demeaning(
derogatory ).
hmmm, I have always took the word demean or demeaning as derogatory, it appears I was incorrect in using that word. My apologies.
