We Need A Revolution In Literature!

[hillwalker]

Alex's stress relief regiment aside, he has a valid point about not getting too worked up about Wolf.

I find ignoring his existence works best. That's why I jumped ship from this petulant thread some months back (at least it seems to have been going on for months). It's not about inviting innovation in literature, it's about onanistic ego-tripping to a captive audience.

H

[Bewlay Brother]

Alex's stress relief regiment aside, he has a valid point about not getting too worked up about Wolf.

Anyway, what we're really seeing emerging here is an argument about who has the right to determine the truth or meaning, with respect to elusive categories of discrimination.

BB is echoing a rather conventional argument, but one that is problematic. Let's go back to the conception of the question that it is wrong for someone to vote for a black president because they are black. A fairly common discourse that emerged during Obama's election which implicitly, in a rather cowardly way, critiques the legitimacy of African American political choice and the legitimacy of Obama's election itself. However, where does the idea that people voted for Obama because he was black even come from. Let's not act like politicians are blank slates and we judge them merely by their policies, we also care about their cultural origins and ties to communities because we understand this effects their political actions. Even if someone voted for Obama simply because he was black, which is a rather tenuous fantasy to begin with, then we should also consider how this may reflect someone voting for someone they think has a greater tendency to have their best interest at heart. Darcy brought up the history of discrimination in America, this has left a legacy of distrust amongst African Americans which is fully justifiable. If you have grown up seeing generations of non-black elected officials not act in your best interest, might it not be a rational political choice, in terms of likely political policy to support someone black? There is nothing about voting for Obama because he is black that implies someone thinks that black people are not competent, that they are voting against a white candidate, or that they are not considering aspects of rational political action.

As to people who support gay rights dehumanizing gays, or people who support affirmative action dehumanizing blacks, that just strikes me as a rhetorical attempt to silence political voice one disagrees with. The implication that these actions are dehumanizing relies on a the appropriation of the motives of others, such that you are defining the thoughts and beliefs of people you whose minds you have no access to. It is a bizarre strategy, often deployed in conservative political rhetoric. That and the so-called reverse-racism argument, which is itself very flawed.

We are past the comment you are trying to argue. Remember that it was only a by-the-way comment. It is clear that liberals didn't vote for Obama because he is black. If anything, they did so because he is a black liberal. The same people despite black conservatives, call them self-loathing, and do everything they can to discredit them.

I only satirized white guilt because Darcy and Wolf are both very guilty of that.

Please stop trying to accuse me of generalizing. I've always been careful not to say "All etc etc etc". I'm talking about people guilty of what I am talking about, and then other times I am talking about concepts, etc. Also there was the whole farce just to prove clear as day to everyone how much of a phony Wolf is.

And I'm not trying to say I know what people are thinking when I say they dehumanize or belittle people. I'm basing that observation off of their actions.

Why shy away from calling blacks black? That is the color of the skin, is it not? Is there something embarrassing about that? Is there a particularly jarring effect when you hear that word? Are they like infants and need to be protected by the caring white man from the naysayers and bad people out to get them? There is no logic to it. Blacks are black. That is their skin color. Not all blacks in America are from Africa. There is absolutely no logic at all to just with a broad brush call all blacks in America "African-American".

And people like Wolf are almost always heavily heavily in favor of welfare and everything like that. They push for dependency for blacks at any point they can. This is belittling. They will never criticize a black for his actions. It is always someone else's fault. For their juvenile perspectives, they think this is the height of humanity. The thing is that one of the biggest part about being an adult human being is being judged, good or bad, by your actions. They deprive them of this.

I don't feel like explaining the whole gay thing again. It is similar though.

You see, I am talking about people like Wolf now. Not everybody. I don't do that. I know most people are in the middle somewhere and nothing dangerous. They aren't guilty of it. Unlike lots of you, I am not so quick to call someone a white supremacist or a racist or a bigot who hates gays or anything so harsh so quickly.

The accusations of me being prejudiced towards gays or a white supremacist were 50x times worse than what I said to Wolf. My opinion of him was based on his thoughts and personality, etc. His opinion of me was based on the fumes stemming from the fact I wasn't cheerleading his opinion.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Holy ****ing ****, this has been one of the most entertaining threads ever! I hope you stick around Bewlay Brother, you definitely get things going. Careful with the insults, though, you'll get some super-scary infraction points for that.

Now excuse me while I go watch some porn and have a lovley little wank.

[Bewlay Brother]

I find ignoring his existence works best. That's why I jumped ship from this petulant thread some months back (at least it seems to have been going on for months). It's not about inviting innovation in literature, it's about onanistic ego-tripping to a captive audience.

H

Hmmm you know what I just realized? This whole time I've been acting like I need to prove how much of a phony Wolf is. I never thought that maybe you all already have come to that conclusion? I mean come on, it is pretty obvious!

Holy ****ing ****, this has been one of the most entertaining threads ever! I hope you stick around Bewlay Brother, you definitely get things going. Careful with the insults, though, you'll get some super-scary infraction points for that.

Now excuse me while I go watch some porn and have a lovley little wank.

If I don't get banned I'll definitely stick around. I like the people here, even if I don't agree with them. Well, I do not like Wolf. He is a terrible human being. Though Darcy seems fine to me. The person with the Bowie avatar is cool too, but it will take me at least a month to get over the fact that he/she implied I wasn't a fan of David Bowie. I love David Bowie more than any man has ever loved another man.

And if I do get banned, I will be furious if Wolf isn't too. A baseless bigoted accusation of being a white supremacist is much worse than a precise explanation of faults that has a basis in reality.

[smerdyakov]

It's not about inviting innovation in literature, it's about onanistic ego-tripping to a captive audience.

Hill, you're a gas man. I had to look onanism up. Best word I've learned in ages. Hell of a word!

[Bewlay Brother]

Hill, you're a gas man. I had to look onanism up. Best word I've learned in ages. Hell of a word!

+1

I was going to say same thing. Man!

[OrphanPip]

Jun implied you weren't a Bowie fan, not I.

And I didn't accuse anyone of being racist or anti-gay.

[B. Laumness]

Yes, the thread is entertaining. Thanks to BB (or should I say SP?). I’m listening to Hunky Dory; I hadn't listened to it for a long time; it was one of my favorite albums, though.

[Bewlay Brother]

Jun implied you weren't a Bowie fan, not I.

And I didn't accuse anyone of being racist or anti-gay.

Oh damn. I apologize for that. It turns out it is JuniperWoolf who I was thinking of, and I was also wrong to say that she accused me of being bigoted towards gay. She actually said that I have a beef with gay culture. I wouldn't quite say that, but there is a huge difference between gay culture and homosexuality. I can see where she got that idea, either way.

[hillwalker]

Hill, you're a gas man. I had to look onanism up. Best word I've learned in ages. Hell of a word!

See? That's why it's called the Literature Network. Your own on-line thesaurus :-)

H

[Bewlay Brother]

It comes to my attention that on the short story forum, on the thread of one of the worst short stories I have ever read in my life, "Babies", people saw my joke comparing it to Finnegans Wake, and thought I was serious.

I was not being serious.

Oh, and Hillwalker used the word onanistic again. Love that word. What is the generally associated figurative meaning of it though?

[Scheherazade]

~

Well, this was fun... Let's do it again sometime soon.

~