View Single Post
Old 11-23-2009, 07:33 AM   #1
MsMerrick
Member

How Do You Identify?:
Queer Feminist Femme....
Preferred Pronoun?:
She
Relationship Status:
Single and Singular....
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New York City....
Posts: 277
Thanks: 855
Thanked 646 Times in 166 Posts
Rep Power: 4638166
MsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST ReputationMsMerrick Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Medusa View Post
Merrick,

I honestly cannot understand why you would insist that I am intentionally "trashing" or "falsely representing" a thread on the other site when I have clearly explained that my read of those terms translated to what I wrote. I was going to ask if you missed my posts where I explained myself but it seems that you didnt, this gives me even more pause because you are still insisting that I am trashing by falsely representing here? I havent heard "Liar, Liar, pants on fire" in a while but I read it reallllll well.

Just a refresher: When I read the title of the thread "Old Terms in a New Age", I heard "old" juxtaposed with "new age" as in "outdated", "antiquated".
I promise you there was no nefarious intent when I parsed "old" into "antiquated" when I am talking about this issue.

I asked a question. That is not trashing a site or a thread, no matter how many times its said. This was my way of trying to have a new conversation that had nothing to do with the video that was posted there (however great it was!). I merely wanted people's read on how the terms Butch or Femme might be seen as antiquated/old and their thoughts on that. THAT was my thought process, nothing more.

a
1 - I didn't insist any such thing. I said what I said, and you quoted, there was no "echo" within, I can't stop you from adding something in, but thats your add, not mine.
As you your self keep saying, there was a false inference, the motivation is your business, I didn't presume one.
2- The point of using another site, as a jumping off point for a Thread, is where you lose me. There was no need. But if you absolutely had to then an actual reading of the opening post, beyond the Title, seems a must do , in my book. If you had done so, then no mix up of words, juxtopositioning one for the other, would have occurred because the actual subject had nothing to do with either word.
3- Personally, I have always thought it a good rule, to not bring in outside sites. Kind of like talking about someone who isn't there. Not a good idea
You have a nice site here, wouldn't it be cool, if it survived on its own merit, without constant references to "other' sites.
As the owner, you set the standard. Like it o r not, that's how it goes...
MsMerrick is offline   Reply With Quote