Etiquette

[S. A. Modena]

In article <1994Feb28.155225.1 at eagle.wesleyan.edu> lappel at eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
>In all of this thread of responses to perceived homophobic and racist
>remarks within a scientific posting, I seem to read only three types of
>responses suggested:
>-Censor the poster
>-Attack the poster, either personally or in a generic flame
>-Ignore the remarks
>
>I find all of these choices objectionable.  Censorship is generally a lousy
>answer to anything.  Attacks are almost as bad, and tend to get overblown.  And
>ignoring hate speech allows it to be perpetuated as if it were acceptable to
>the community at large.
>What is really needed is merely to point out racist and homophobic statements
                          ^^^^^^              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You've overlooked the hetero-phobic remarks that are such common
currency.

>and assumptions for what they are.  That way, the poster (or speaker) can
>clarify his or her point, in case the point was mis-stated or misinterpreted,
>or reconsider the issue, in case they were really unaware of the racism or
>homophobia that had crept into their thinking.  
>It is hard to change a person's thinking by attacking them.  Education is much
>more effective, and we all need help now and then.
>
>Laurel F. Appel    			      LAPPEL at EAGLE.WESLEYAN.EDU
>Genetics Group
>Dept. of Biology                              My opinions are my own.
>Wesleyan University                           Card-carrying member of the ACLU.
>Middletown, CT  06459


Steve Modena   nmodena at unity.ncsu.edu