Well, I owe you an apology, Jn.
I edited out that part of my post that I felt was inflammatory (I didn't delete the post! I didn't!) because I did not want to hurt your feelings, nor did I want to "smack back" at you because I felt smacked at.
My post as it stands now is simpler, and more clear... I truly did protest the word because I had seen its sting. It didn't sting me... it couldn't. But I quite clearly saw how it stung someone who had worked her butt off to achieve her personal goals, and was being chastised for it.
But I am glad that you saw the more confrontational part that I had written, because your response to it goes a long way to further my understanding of what your mindset has been in this thread, which relieves a lot of that "smacked at" vibe I was getting.
I apologize to you, Jn, because I did not have the faith in both of us that I could make such a strong statement, and have it lead anywhere except to more rancour.
You misunderstood my response to Faramond, and also my earlier observation about objections to this word, Anthy, but it is true that I am having difficulty conveying clearly what I mean.
This may be a new phenom for you, but it happens to me all the time.
I only added that sentence for Faramond in case he interpreted my earlier argument as you did - that objection to the word implied racism - and I wanted to assure him that I would not have used a word intending to make that kind of backhanded accusation either. I would not choose a word with deliberate intent to insult any of our posters, no matter what the reason they might have felt insult.
Then your intent was quite straightforward with that sentence, and I am glad for the clarification. I was reading subtleties that did not exist.
And I understand completely why you would object vehemently to a word you have seen used to hurt a friend.
Yes. It truly is as simple as that. Thank you for understanding that.
My surprise at the strength of objection to this word among multiple posters - because really, it was not just "we don't like it" but very strong condemnatory language was used - my surprise arose in part from the fact that other words that sound much worse to me met with no objection at all <snip> If it was purely a negative reaction to the perceived racism of the word, then I would have expected an even stronger reaction to defense of the n-word and instead there was none. <snip> and because on a previous occassion when use of the n-word was defended, there was no objection to this at all.
I wonder if there was less of a "differential reaction" than you perhaps thought. I think the way the word was used, in each instance, is key. It was your very casual use of a word I consider ugly that made me stand up and respond.
In your post, you wrote,
"community is saying loud and clear that they know what an oreo is a don't want any, thank you". If we were to go back and substitute the N-word for "oreo" in that sentence, like this,
"the community is saying loud and clear that they know what an N* is a don't want any, thank you", do you not think there would be an outcry? You would have had one from me, had I seen a sentence like that. And I can be confident that I would not be alone.
This is not to imply that the two words are similarly weighted; not at all. It is simply meant to illustrate how context is important in the level of emotional response.
And it is also true that the word oreo implies, in a left-handed way, that being White is bad.
Interesting. I feel like "oreo" implies that a black "acting" like a white is bad; specifically, in my own personal experience, that blacks having the temerity to be educated is bad. I never have felt that the word has any direct implication towards whites at all.
I think, Anth, that a great deal of the 'kaboom' that went on in my mind over the ensuing discussion was because the act itself in question (the Primary strategy) was so obviously racist in my view and yet people were defending it;
I don't remember defending the political strategy you describe, but then again, I can't assume you are talking about me. For my part, I think I was so distracted by the startling (to me) use of the word "oreo" that all other topic points faded away.
It is not that objection to 'oreo' makes one a racist in some backhanded way,
Thank you, Jn. That snippet of sentence right there helps relieve quite a bit of stress for me.
Edit: It took me quite a while to finish this post and get around to posting it; sick kids, phone calls, etc. It was meant to appear right after Jn's post directed to me.
)
), but I cannot 'prove' myself of course. 
It might be that MLK had an affair - I've no idea! - but it's certainly not part of the rumor mill the way JFK's affairs have been.) 
