SnitgirrRl writes Thursday Nov 19/98: Though, I would like to remind you that not once but twice you have referred to me, as a person and not just my ideas, as 'obsessive compulsive.' So I guess that you are quite guilty of unconsciously deploying metaphors of disability without being cognizant of doing so.
Doyle What would it take to resolve a conflict between you and I about obsessive and compulsiveness? I believe the content of what I wrote to Jim was different than the content of what I wrote to you. I think I wrote to you that moralizing about stuff leads to situations of sectarian idealism. In those situations obsessive and compulsive behavior arises. My point to Jim was about how disabled people are labelled marginals. From what you write it sounds like I called you obsessive and compulsive. Did that seem so?
Doyle Can you explain where the guilt arises here in a non-moral ways? I mean what if you aren't moralizing at me, what you are talking about?
SnitgirrRl I'm certain that you've experienced times when someone has pointed out unconsious sexism, racism, classism, etc on your part. It can feel unfair when your arguments are sidetracked completely off topic.
Doyle It happens that I need my understanding raised when it is appropriate. I wasn't born into a progressive family. My family was extreme racist bigots at the most extreme end of the scale. I will always have to learn. But my heart is in the left, and I accept I must always learn and change. In any case it isn't unfair to raise that I am being a racist when some conversational point comes up that is tangental to my racist attitude. In that case raise the issue. Whether or not it is tangental, and feels unfair, I need to hear that I was being a goddamned racist. Or whatever.
Doyle You have a different understanding of metaphors than I do. I do not advocate cleaning up metaphors, since a metaphor is a basic form of brain cognition, and that process is different from the rule like thinking you suggest. regards, Doyle Saylor