4 ms·
What characterization? I am simply asking to not be spoken for, not saying the commentor isn't entitled to have an opinion. I say clearly above that I am OK wi
by vy8vWJlco 13y ago
What characterization?
I am simply asking to not be spoken for, not saying the commentor isn't entitled to have an opinion. I say clearly above that I am OK with the comment as a mere opinion ("No, that part was OK" ...).
I'm curious if you read my reply closely before responding, or if you decided in advance what you wanted to say if I replied to you, because you seemed not to have received its intended meaning.
To repeat: I am not saying the commentor isn't entitled to an opinion, only saying that that opinion is wrong from my perspective and for my case since it is an opinion about me (and I was included by the word "we"). I am also entitled to my opinion.
On top of that, I also happen to think that my opinions about what is best for me should matter more in the public's view than what someone else thinks is best for me. I am not property to be managed, a sheep to be herded, or a child to be guarded. I am my own person - the horse's mouth, for my part - and I consider it offensive to be spoken for. Have you ever been told something is "for your own good"? If so, did you appreciate it?
- dllthomas 13y agoThe only bit of your post I objected to, discourse-wise, was the phrase: Long story short, please don't say "we," since your ideas are strictly your own. This sounds like you are saying the commentator is not entitled to voice their opinion of the effects of a policy on a group if members of that group might hold a different opinion. You call this "speaking for you"; I say this characterization is incorrect - it is "speaking about you".
- vy8vWJlco 13y agoSure - while it is an opinion about me (and others), it is also (simultaneously, though not exclusively) a recommendation (perhaps only an implied one) about what is in my best interests, when I alone can decide if I am safe, for example (it is not a lamp, or a number, it is my own feeling): therefore the commentor is speaking for me. Furthermore, since I define safety for myself, my assertion that the comment does not reflect my interests also makes it misrepresentation (in addition to speaking for me) in my case.
- dllthomas 13y agoHm, I wouldn't call safety a feeling at all. I'll stipulate it and give some more thought to your position in that context. It definitely colors things a bit; I'm not sure whether it legitimately changes things. On the flip-side, would you feel differently if the attribute being discussed was clearly not a feeling? "I don't like guns and I think the fewer people have them, the shorter we are", or some such.