for What’s in a Name10/20/2006 c1 
2monsoonblues
This was well-written, without excessive word usage (so many essays are long-winded), and gets the point across fairly well. 'When we de-humanize another person we make it all right to behave in a manner in which we would not normally act', I couldn't agree with you more on that.
Overall, lucid with a nice flowing style. Thanks for the read.
2monsoonbluesThis was well-written, without excessive word usage (so many essays are long-winded), and gets the point across fairly well. 'When we de-humanize another person we make it all right to behave in a manner in which we would not normally act', I couldn't agree with you more on that.
Overall, lucid with a nice flowing style. Thanks for the read.
10/19/2006 c1 1Formerly
Why would you class "Jews" and "Whites" with "Niggers"? I think you mean "kikes" and "crackers," or something along those lines. It still doesn't really apply though. The ideal would be to just not give a shit.
1FormerlyWhy would you class "Jews" and "Whites" with "Niggers"? I think you mean "kikes" and "crackers," or something along those lines. It still doesn't really apply though. The ideal would be to just not give a shit.
10/18/2006 c1 10the coffee fiend
That was a well written and moulded essay. I really enjoyed reading this, and your views on the divisive nature of some euphemisms. Your use of intext quotes was very smooth, and related well to the essay as a whole (some people just chuck quotes in for brownie points!)
the coffee fiend
10the coffee fiendThat was a well written and moulded essay. I really enjoyed reading this, and your views on the divisive nature of some euphemisms. Your use of intext quotes was very smooth, and related well to the essay as a whole (some people just chuck quotes in for brownie points!)
the coffee fiend