In a message dated 3/6/01 10:04:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, N.Faulkner@tesco.net writes:
<< So go preen so smugly, and congratulate yourself on your adroit semantic manoeuvring, and otherwise pamper your over-inflated ego with whatever other contrived reassurances it demands.<<
Dear me, what an alarming case of projection. Someone else omits a critical word in their debate, and *I'm* somehow guilty of semantic manoeuvring, ego and self-congratulation.
Do not on any account reflect on the possibility that you have as good as
admitted that you knew what we were talking about from the start and deliberately obstructed constructive dialogue for whatever discreditable reasons you choose to harbour.<<
Since you and your cohort never once stated what you actually meant, that would be a tad unrealistic, don't you think? I'm flattered, however, that you believe I have powers of extrasensory perception. Why, I must have automatically *known* that the repeated word of the generalized word 'sex' in the phrase "pornography and sex are not the same thing" actually meant "pornography and the performance of the act of sex are not the same thing." Yep, I'm plub flattered. I'm patting myself on the back now, as you recommend.
Do you seriously think you're not that transparent?>>
Well, I'll certainly take credit for some clarity, thanks.
Leah