Reply #35: I think something needs to be clarified here

[ant]

At first I voted no because I do not support a ban on words, I believe context matters, and I don't see the point of banning words as a way of changing attitudes.

But then I reread Skinner's post, and he clearly says:
To be more precise, the specific issues for discussion here are whether people should be permitted to use the term "bitch" when referring to high-profile political opponents, and whether members should be permitted to use the term "bitch slap" in almost any context.

So, we are not talking about an outright ban, we are talking about banning a particular use of the word. This eliminates the argument about context because we are very clearly talking about a ban that applies in a very well defined context.

And that context is clearly sexist. When used as an insult, the word can only be used one of two ways. Against a woman to insult her generally, or against a man to insult him by implicitly referring to him as a woman. Saying that a man's a bitch is the same as saying he's a pussy and has no balls. The sexism there is pretty damn obvious, I think.

The bitch-slap is similar, but almost a bit more offensive because violence against women really is a huge problem in this country.

So again:

We are not talking about a complete ban on the word, so arguments about free speech and context don't really apply.

We are talking about banning a very specific, clearly sexist way of using the word, so I'm curious to hear why people should be allowed to use sexist language on the board, especially when racist or homophobic language is clearly not tolerated or, more imporantly, even considered by its members.

The fact that "bitch" when used this way would HAVE to be banned when similar racist or homophobic terms do not require official attention is all by itself evidence of the sexism on this board. Flame away, but don't let it get in the way of some self-reflection.