Dwight Stewart wrote:

"Dave Heil" wrote:

Sadly, some people attempt to forge
a tie between the terms "polite" and
"political correctness". There is no
link between them. Jim didn't treat
Kim's callsign badly; he didn't use it
at all. After all, it could be easily
argued that Kim didn't treat amateur
radio with respect in choosing her
call. A number of us believe that her
choice was tacky and tactless. (snip)

So, because Kim did something, it gave Jim the right to do something?
Isn't that a two wrongs don't make a right situation, Dave?

Jim has every "right" not to use Kim's callsign whether she does
something or not. Kim has no power to force him to use her callsign or
make him give approval to her choice.

Regardless, lets get to the basics of this issue. What is wrong with the
word "tit?" My dictionary defines it as a noun meaning "either of two soft
fleshy milk-secreting glandular organs on the chest of a woman." Seem rather
innocuous to me. I assume Kim, like most women, has those "soft fleshy
milk-secreting glandular organs." So why would so many be offended by her
very mention of that fact? It's not like she's refering to the sexual organs
or something.

Thanks for the detailed definition, Dwight. The term is vulgar slang
and you have, I'm sure, seen Kim's most recent explanation for having
chosen her call. Kim's choice is simply another of her several ways of
thumbing her nose at the world. Maybe you're the kind of fellow who
would be proud to have his wife, mother or daughter choose a similar
call. I'm not.

It might say something about their
character but it doesn't say anything
negative about it. The FCC looks
the other way with regard to language
used in prime time television these
days. (snip)

So you're comparing a woman's breasts to the filthy or offensive language
on television? Isn't that somewhat prudish, Dave?

No, Dwight. I'm comparing tasteless and tacky with tasteless and tacky.

Dave K8MN