* * * This message was from Joseph DeMartino to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

{at}MSGID: 
{at}REPLY: 
Methuselah Jones wrote:

> While you didn't use any slang or other loaded terms, you did still make
> a generalized assertion about the behavior and/or attitudes of a group of
> people. It would be the same as saying, "African-Americans are
all....."
> or "Italians are all...."

No, she didn't.  She suggested that people who didn't see the harm in
the offensive term that started this discussion were most likely
members of a group that did not commonly have such terms used about it.
 She did *not* say that *all* members of said group would believe "a"
or act "b".  She didn't say "all white males use such offensive terms,
therefore you must be white and male."  She said, "White males are less
likely to be the targets of racist terms, therefore less likely to take
such seriously, therefore more likely to think that they can be used
'innocently' or without malice."   Therefore the set of people who
don't think what Phil said was offensive is likely to have a lot of
members from the larger set of people who are white and male.  But she
could not have meant that all white, male human beings of European
descent believe such things, because she knows that I fit all three
categories and I'm the one who object to Phil's use of the term in the
first place.  

Regards, 

Joe
                                                                           
                                                  
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32