[Macsenour]

>Note that none of this means I'd be rude

Not calling a knight Sir, is rude to THEM. They earned it,they were recognized for their achievement. To not call them Sir is rude.

[bhickey]

> They earned it,they were recognized for their achievement.

So what of it? Knighthoods are handed out to political cronies like they're Jaffa Cakes. Besides, I'm not a subject of Her Majesty the Queen, Elizabeth Windsor. Demanding deference to the monarchy is an insult to civil society.

[Macsenour]

As I said, it's rude to THEM. My point is that you are deciding that you are not rude, when you shouldn't be the judge in this case.

[jrs235]

Why should the other person get to decide and be judge on what's rude and disrespectful? If I believe it's rude if you do not kiss the ground I walk on and that's it's disrespectful if you don't obey my commands, tough shit for me and anyone else who thinks that way.

If someone is rude to you in your eyes and based on your standards, how you react is still on you and is your responsibility. You can still be respectful to rude to people.

Respect is a two way street.

[Macsenour]

Respect is a two way street, agreed. The other person decides if it's rude to THEM. You decide for yourself if something is rude. The knight will decide for himself if it is rude to not call him Sir. I think it's wrong for someone to say it's NOT rude to NOT call him Sir. It should be up to THEM.

[bhickey]

This is patently absurd. Let's walk through an example: I think you're being rude to everyone here. It's wrong for you to disagree with me.

By abandoning any pretence of objective analysis you're reducing rudeness to a meaningless concept.

[jrs235]

Fair enough.