View Single Post
Old 04-01-2013, 10:25 AM   #11079
Semantics
Senior Member

How Do You Identify?:
malapropist
Preferred Pronoun?:
she
Relationship Status:
single
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England
Posts: 2,169
Thanks: 6,367
Thanked 3,968 Times in 1,201 Posts
Rep Power: 21474854
Semantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST ReputationSemantics Has the BEST Reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobi View Post

Before I feel justified in getting bent out of shape about this, it would help to know what course this is for and the rationale the prof gave for picking this particular article. Context sometimes changes initial perceptions.
Here's a link to the article:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/When+c...s.-a0238095380


I personally don't find the article offensive, because it's not using incest as rationale against same-sex marriage. It's looking at the biological vs. sociological reasons against incestuous couplings. The main arguments against same sex marriages tend to be sociological (although you do get the people who throw in the idea that same sex couples can't procreate, which is used as a biological argument against it). The author is trying to take this idea and apply to incestuous marriages.

I can see why KCBUTCH found it annoying and triggering. It gets old to always see the comparison made. However, I think if it's being used in its appropriate academic context (which isn't an argument against same-sex marriage), it doesn't offend me. Although as Kobi said, the context of its use could easily change my opinion on it.

Last edited by Semantics; 04-01-2013 at 10:27 AM.
Semantics is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Semantics For This Useful Post: