[kj] (ot) Jaz Straw

[ade]

No worries - let's agree to disagree. I personally think the veil is a tiny
part of a bigger problem.
I think the phrase 'when in Rome' makes absolute sense. It's certainly a
technique I've used when
abroad...
  -----Original Message-----
  From: gathering-bounces at misera.net [mailto:gathering-bounces at misera.net]On
Behalf Of Jim Harper
  Sent: 11 October 2006 23:29
  To: Gathering
  Subject: [kj] (ot) Jaz Straw


  I'm all for compromise in communication, but in this situation, I really
don't see how the veil is an impediment to communication. No, you can't read
every nuance of what the other person is saying, but you can't do that with
non-veil wearers either.  Maybe you can't see what _expression is on their
face, but I'm not a veil-wearer and I keep my true feelings from showing on
my face all the time, as everyone does. All you can do is go by what you
*can* pick up on- I don't get why this situation is so different.

  Jim.

  ade <ade at the-lab.zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
    Whitey - I think it got the point across well ! :)

    If you ordered food from a restaurant in Big Gay Paris, who compromises?
The dude expects you to
    have made the effort, so you have to order in the local tongue.
Otherwise the face gets pulled & the
    interest in your order wanes.. (from previous experience! :)

    Seems pretty one-way too, but I think entirely fair & I don't see it as
prejudice - it's about making
    the effort. I think compromises HAVE to be made when it comes to
communication, in order to
    'tune-in' to each other, but that does not render each party
transparent/devoid of culture.


    ade


  http://www.flipsidemovies.com
  http://jimharper.blogspot.com
  Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20061011/50dbab6c/attachment.html