[hippieflowergirl]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

As another trouble-maker on this thread, I wanted to explain why I think that the meanings of words matter. Now, because I'm going to use examples using race I want to make it absolutely clear that I do not think anyone on this thread is racist, has said anything racist, or would ever say anything racist. It is just that the examples I have at hand use race.

If words evolve and have no flexible meaning then it would require me to take a face value the following statement: "I'm not a racist. Some of my best friend's are black. I just don't know what you people are calling yourself this decade so I just use the n-word." Or, one my favorites..."I'm not a racist. I just think that there's the 'good blacks', like you, and the n-word blacks, like the rest of them". Now, does the disclaimer "I'm not a racist" mean that the person is not expressing racist sentiment? Does the word racist have a meaning that is commonly agreed upon and, more or less, fixed or is it fluid such that someone could make statements like the two above (both of which I have heard, in some variation, multiple times in my 42 years) and by merely invoking the phrase "I'm not a racist..." means that whatever racist might mean, it cannot mean them.

I live by the idea that racist (like other words) have a more-or-less fixed meaning and that merely saying "I'm not a racist but..." does not confer some magical, water-to-wine fairy dust on the words that immediately follow such that no matter how racist they might SOUND they are not, actually, racist because the person has just proclaimed that they are not racist.

I use this as an example and I'll admit it is an extreme, in your face, example because I want to make it clear WHY I think that language matters in the way that I do.

I am perfectly willing to admit that my view may be hopelessly antiquarian and, if I dare say so, 20th century. It probably is. I am a product of my time.

Cheers
Aj

i agree. language does matter. it simply has huge variation in its meaning (which we're proving right now). this isnt a discussion about the meaning of the word "lesbian" anymore. it's a discussion about the ways in which we can each see a word or a sentence or an idea as meaning something very different than it was intended.

i do not dislike the word lesbian. i dont dislike lesbians. i dont dislike female identified lesbians. and yet, that's how i came across to some people. i wanted to discuss the obvious (to me only) expansion of language that happens to some people when they exit one definition and enter another and so i joined the conversation. i expressed an opinion based on a common idea for many BFP members. i didnt do it in a way that was clear. it also, as has been stated, wasnt asked for or invited. but...sigh...i did it.

my example is less obvious than your very good one: i dont use the word lesbian to describe myself and then require that my attraction to and/or behavior with someone who identifies themselves as a straight man be included in the definition of the word.

clear as muddy muddy mud?