Somewhat OT: Using alternate spellings for meat

[Guest guest]

Pat wrote:

> Same reason I usually spell meat me*t LOL (although some spell it meet). We

> try not to discuss animal flesh on this list cuz the list is vegetarian, but

> sometimes it's needed a bit to explain what something is or was used for,

> such as the Old Bay Seasoning, or referring to, say, vegetarian 'chikken'

> flavouring, ya know? As a vegetarian I may not eat f*sh either, so . . . ;=)

 

*shrug* Ok...don't get me wrong, I don't care what spellings people

use, I just find it unnecessary...but then again, I think when people

spell woman: wimmin, wombon, wymin, etc it's silly...I get the idea

behind it (like with the meat thing) but personally, I wouldn't use

it...to each his/her own, you know? (I also think it's because of the

writer in me. The english language is difficult enough! *laugh*

*shrug*)

 

Thanks for satisfying my curiosity...

 

Gina

[Guest guest]

> *shrug* Ok...don't get me wrong, I don't care what spellings people

> use, I just find it unnecessary...

 

As long as you don't mind ;=) Then we're agreed. No problem.

 

>but then again, I think when people spell woman: wimmin, wombon, wymin,

etc it's silly...

 

Not silly. A political statement. Other people's politics sometimes seem silly,

which is why I don't encourage politics on this list. My spelling of fish as

f*sh

seems to you to be silly, but it is done to avoid unnecessary (your word too)

use of an otherwise more offensive word to some. ya know? ;=) We don't

discuss some things on this list, for very good reason, as I explained. No

offense intended. And I really don't mind if you don't like my putting an

asterisk

in the middle of these words ;=) Okay? LOL

 

>I get the idea behind it (like with the meat thing) but personally, I wouldn't

>>

>use it...

 

Okay.

 

>to each his/her own, you know?

 

Well, not quite. You see, whether you agree or not we still don't discuss me*t

on this list unless it is necessary - and if you don't like that, I'm sorry.

Actually,

there are few cases when it is necessary really ;=) Right? I think we're agreed

on that. No problem here. You okay with it?

 

>(I also think it's because of the writer in me. The english language is

difficult

enough! *laugh* > *shrug*)

 

Oh we should read again some of the more renowned of the writers in the

English language - Virginia Woolf and James Joyce come immediately to

mind, to follow your 'political' writerly theme, together with Joyce's use of

alternative words, especially in, say _Finnegan's Wake_. And Shaw, of

course, had very definite, although different, views on English spelling. No

doubt this is what you are meaning?

 

Hey, too bad this is off topic, because it'd be great fun to discuss this

further.

You say 'the writer in me'? Did I teach you at some time or other???? Please

don't be shy ;=) Perhaps for an MFA thesis or a PhD? Please tell me which

and where - what country, what university, etc.

 

> Thanks for satisfying my curiosity...

 

Anytime, hon, anytime ;=) But I rather think this discussion has gone, on list

at

least, as far as it should go. Okay? Let's move on ;=) I know you'll be ok with

this.

 

Pat

[Guest guest]

The changeable spellings of women is a completely different issue.

 

That is for reClaimists to use to redefine themselves, not using the context of

being an addition to 'men'. They are often lesbians, feminists, and serious

fighters on the front lines of social and political change. Since fish don't

speak English, nor would they feel it's necessary to reClaim their flesh in the

language, since they would probably prefer not to be referred to at all, to

compare these alternative spellings is to diminish some wimmin's deeply held

beliefs and their work on the issues. They do not deserve to be derided for

wishing to define themselves for themselves.

 

Trey

 

*shrug* Ok...don't get me wrong, I don't care what spellings people

use, I just find it unnecessary...but then again, I think when people

spell woman: wimmin, wombon, wymin, etc it's silly...I get the idea

behind it (like with the meat thing) but personally, I wouldn't use

it...to each his/her own, you know? (I also think it's because of the

writer in me. The english language is difficult enough! *laugh*

*shrug*)

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Pat wrote:

> > *shrug* Ok...don't get me wrong, I don't care what spellings people

> > use, I just find it unnecessary...

>

> As long as you don't mind ;=) Then we're agreed. No problem.

 

nah...I don't care...it's just my $0.02...

 

> >but then again, I think when people spell woman: wimmin, wombon, wymin,

> etc it's silly...

>

> Not silly. A political statement. Other people's politics sometimes seem

silly,

> which is why I don't encourage politics on this list. My spelling of fish as

f*sh

> seems to you to be silly, but it is done to avoid unnecessary (your word too)

> use of an otherwise more offensive word to some. ya know? ;=) We don't

> discuss some things on this list, for very good reason, as I explained. No

> offense intended. And I really don't mind if you don't like my putting an

asterisk

> in the middle of these words ;=) Okay? LOL

 

Well, I don't consider the politics behind it silly, just changing the

words, but as I said, I don't really care one way or the other...as

long as I can read it, it's all good...

 

> >to each his/her own, you know?

>

> Well, not quite. You see, whether you agree or not we still don't discuss me*t

> on this list unless it is necessary - and if you don't like that, I'm sorry.

Actually,

> there are few cases when it is necessary really ;=) Right? I think we're

agreed

> on that. No problem here. You okay with it?

 

Oh, I know that...I don't have a problem with that at all, believe me...

 

> >(I also think it's because of the writer in me. The english language is

difficult

> enough! *laugh* > *shrug*)

>

> Oh we should read again some of the more renowned of the writers in the

> English language - Virginia Woolf and James Joyce come immediately to

> mind, to follow your 'political' writerly theme, together with Joyce's use of

> alternative words, especially in, say _Finnegan's Wake_. And Shaw, of

> course, had very definite, although different, views on English spelling. No

> doubt this is what you are meaning?

>

 

Oh, heck, we could take this to the level of British v. American

English too, but since today is my " Friday " , it'll make my head hurt.

*grin* I do like those writers though....

 

> Hey, too bad this is off topic, because it'd be great fun to discuss this

further.

> You say 'the writer in me'? Did I teach you at some time or other???? Please

> don't be shy ;=) Perhaps for an MFA thesis or a PhD? Please tell me which

> and where - what country, what university, etc.

 

Oh, I wish I had an MFA for writing...I love to write, and write a

lot: essays, poetry, short fiction...I dno't know if you taught me, I

went to Elmira College in upstate NY...at this point in my life I'd

need work to pay for school, and the only writing I could take there

would be technical writing (although, I *do* like that as well!)...

 

> > Thanks for satisfying my curiosity...

>

> Anytime, hon, anytime ;=) But I rather think this discussion has gone, on list

at

> least, as far as it should go. Okay? Let's move on ;=) I know you'll be ok

with

> this.

 

No prob...like I said, it was mostly my $0.02 about language and

all...It doesn't really matter to me how you spell anything as long as

I can read and understand it...heck, I can even read " typo " to a point

(I have a friend on IM that does typos all the time)...

 

Gina

[Guest guest]

Hi again Gina ;=)

 

> nah...I don't care...it's just my $0.02...

 

We're cool, then ;=)

this list unless it is necessary - and if you don't like that, I'm sorry.

Actually,

 

> Oh, heck, we could take this to the level of British v. American

> English too, but since today is my " Friday " , it'll make my head hurt.

> *grin* I do like those writers though....

 

LOL oh okay - let's not go there then LOL Good point!

 

>I went to Elmira College in upstate NY...at this point in my life I'd

> need work to pay for school, and the only writing I could take there

> would be technical writing (although, I *do* like that as well!)...

 

Oh bad luck. But you know, you're probably doing just as well without the

extra plumber's license ;=)

And no. Never taught at Elmira College. It was worth a try, though ;=)

Never mind. We know each other now.

 

And now I guess we'd better go back on topic - ;=) Safer, far safer LOL

 

Best,

 

Pat ;=)

[Guest guest]

Trey wrote:

> The changeable spellings of women is a completely different issue.

>

> That is for reClaimists to use to redefine themselves, not using the context

of being an addition to 'men'. They are often lesbians, feminists, and serious

fighters on the front lines of social and political change.

 

I could disagree with a lot of that, but in the interest of peace and

harmony on the list, I won't do it here (besides Pat would probably

beat me...although, I'd probably like that...nevermind...*evilgrin*).

I'm all for reclaiming and such (in fact, I use dyke to describe

myself instead of lesbian), but there are some that I don't agree

with, that's all. I'm not out to deride anyone or belittle anyone's

beliefs. I'm just stating my opinion. I can give you my full opinion

of what you wrote off-list if you want, because I have serious

disagreements with a lot of the people you call the " serious fighters "

(mostly in the matters of discrimination, not societal, but within the

ranks of feminism and lesbianism itself).

 

The way I see it, define yourself the way you want. I won't argue with

it, or about it. I'm just totally open to the way people are, you

know?

 

Gina

[Guest guest]

WHAT?? Enough already. Spell as you wish, we'll all get the general idea.

 

Has anyone ever made a spicy risotto??

 

Trey Capnerhurst <traesach wrote:

 

The changeable spellings of women is a completely different issue.

 

That is for reClaimists to use to redefine themselves, not using the context of

being an addition to 'men'. They are often lesbians, feminists, and serious

fighters on the front lines of social and political change. Since fish don't

speak English, nor would they feel it's necessary to reClaim their flesh in the

language, since they would probably prefer not to be referred to at all, to

compare these alternative spellings is to diminish some wimmin's deeply held

beliefs and their work on the issues. They do not deserve to be derided for

wishing to define themselves for themselves.

 

Trey

 

*shrug* Ok...don't get me wrong, I don't care what spellings people

use, I just find it unnecessary...but then again, I think when people

spell woman: wimmin, wombon, wymin, etc it's silly...I get the idea

behind it (like with the meat thing) but personally, I wouldn't use

it...to each his/her own, you know? (I also think it's because of the

writer in me. The english language is difficult enough! *laugh*

*shrug*)

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

" Trey Capnerhurst " <traesach wrote,

 

> The changeable spellings of women is a completely different issue.

 

Okay ;=) I'm gonna respond to this, otherwise I'll seem churlish. But I do

suspect that this has gone far enough.

 

But, I would say that you are correct - we are agreed that it is a different

issue.

And I understand that these issues get us all rather distressed when we think

we or our ideas are being derided. And no fish has given me the right to

speak for her or him - but if I don't who will? ;=) I *choose* to spell certain

words meaning animal flesh with an asterisk replacingt one of the internal

letters in the word *because* many of these words are euphemisms for

animal flesh and I consider euphemisms that assist us in continuing a wrong -

any wrong anywhere - to be akin to p*rnography: that is to say, unacceptable

language in a modern world. There's a place for it, and there's a place for

avoiding it.

 

An aside:

And on the subject of p*rn, doesn't allow it. Not even to say that you're

against it, on one of these webpages. So you can't say, for example, 'no spam,

no p*rn' because 's computer rejects the word. Truly.

 

Well, I as a vegetarian reject animal flesh as food. Therefore, not to put a

fine

point on it, I play the game of treating words like me*t (which didn't

originally

mean flesh), p*rk (from porc, Fr for pig), be*f (from Fr boeuf) etc. etc. - all

genteel euphemisms to descibe what people are really eating (aren't I being a

colossal bore??????? Shame on me!) as if they were four-letter words. Like it

or lump it, that's what I (usually) do.

 

So let's close this subject now, please - this non-vegetarian business, that is

;=) Okay? All sympathy for a cause many of us, myself included, have fought

for long and hard. But I would ask both participants to kindly re-sheath their

weapons, shake hands, and return to the subject of the list.

 

<soap box dismounted, kicked aside, broken up for kindling and used for

heating a large pot of coffee for all concerned>

 

Best,

 

Pat ;=)

[Guest guest]

> WHAT?? Enough already. Spell as you wish, we'll all get the general idea.

 

Heh heh heh Okay okay, auntie. We quit. Okay, gurlz?

 

> Has anyone ever made a spicy risotto??

 

Yes - I have, for one. Ages ago I devised a wonderful risotto with all the usual

suspects for asian cooking (onion, garlic, ginger root, chilies) plus cloves,

cinammon, blah blahblah blah blah, tomatoes and tofu. Of course, it's the blah

blah blah part I can't remember some 15 - 20 years later. Never wrote it down

because I made it once a week and didn't need to write it up as a recipe. More

of a pilaf than a risotto, I guess. With some green veg, now that I think -

can't

remember just what. Shall ask the dh if he does ;=) No cheese added, though

- coconut instead. Damme, what was it???? Later.. . .

 

Have YOU ever made a spicy risotto???? should be good, italian style, with

some chilies - just as some Italian pasta has chilies . . .

 

Best,

 

Pat ;=)

[Guest guest]

pat wrote:

> > nah...I don't care...it's just my $0.02...

>

> We're cool, then ;=)

 

Yup...subject done...

 

> Oh bad luck. But you know, you're probably doing just as well without the

> extra plumber's license ;=)

> And no. Never taught at Elmira College. It was worth a try, though ;=)

> Never mind. We know each other now.

>

> And now I guess we'd better go back on topic - ;=) Safer, far safer LOL

 

Yes yes...I've been there done that with the argument

thing...honestly, I wasn't *trying* to start an argument...(or you

could argue that I was and waiting to be beaten...but that's a whole

other list...LOL)

 

Gina

[Guest guest]

Pat wrote:

> So let's close this subject now, please - this non-vegetarian business, that

is

> ;=) Okay? All sympathy for a cause many of us, myself included, have fought

> for long and hard. But I would ask both participants to kindly re-sheath their

> weapons, shake hands, and return to the subject of the list.

 

No prob...I agree that we disagree...it's all good...

 

> <soap box dismounted, kicked aside, broken up for kindling and used for

> heating a large pot of coffee for all concerned>

 

LOL...I like that...although, I'll have tea...I don't do coffee...

 

Gina

[Guest guest]

Have YOU ever made a spicy risotto????

 

Noo, that's why I threw the question out there. Thought I'd ask for a t & t

before experimenting. I'm not sure which direction I would go. Risotto is

typically Italian & Italian is not typically spicy. But there IS Arrabiatta

sauce... That mess w/ginger sounds yummy as heck. Please remember & pass

ingredients & general measurements along! My 1st thought was to toss in

chipotles but that sounds weird. Anybody have thoughts or ideas??

 

And I just wanted to change the blasted t*pic, hahahahahahaaaaa.

Bethie

 

 

 

 

 

 

Check out the new Front Page. - www./a