--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@...> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@> wrote: > > > > Ann, Oh fearless warrior of forthrightness, you are my hero and exemplar. > > You go girl. > > Raunchy, I take this as no small compliment. But I think for my efforts with > Curtis this morning I was "psychologically pooped on". I could be wrong as I > only glanced quickly at his response to me. But, if so, does that make Curtis > a "psychological defecator"? Perhaps I am just feeling the lack of sugar, I > haven't had breakfast yet. > >
LOL! Not to worry. Once the washer completes it's spin cycle, it's all good. http://youtu.be/6_PLnInsh7E > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > ME:> > So no Ann, it is not hypocritical to make fun of religious ideas > > > > and still be against racist remarks. They are not the same. > > > > > > > > > ANN> Ahhh, but the agenda behind, the motivation, the hatred, the > > > > ignorance and the anger can be. Absolutely. And THAT is what I'm > > > > talkin' about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is the heart of it. I am not criticizing Ravi for what I am > > > > imagining are his feelings as you are about me. I am criticizing the > > > > content of his ideas. I couldn't care less what he feels about black > > > > people, I can't do anything about that. But I can challenge ideas he > > > > presents about them that I see as racist. > > > > > > Absolutely, you should bring up the subject of what you may recognize as > > > hateful or bigoted or stereotypically simplistic and off-base. I think it > > > is our responsibility to do this, especially to friends who we are more > > > likely to have influence on by talking about it. But this is also why > > > others have gotten into you a little for the song lyrics and what they > > > actually mean or why you would direct them at someone if, in fact, you > > > did. My opinion on this is marginal and I am not sure exactly what those > > > lyrics are indicating and I don't actually believe your motives were > > > suspect when you directed Emily's attention to them nor do I believe, for > > > one second, that you support rape, either by an individual or a group. > > > > > > > > It is the same with my satire on religion. I am not addressing what > > > > people feel about religion. That is their business. I am addressing > > > > what religions claim. I do not consider religious ideas as protected > > > > ones. > > > > > > This is a whhhoooole 'nother subject and a big one because it gets into > > > ideologies, beliefs that can be deeper than whether a song is talking > > > about rape or about mutual pleasure and it is apparent from what you have > > > written and how I have responded in the past to your religious subject > > > posts that we come from two distinct places on this. But I agree that > > > religious ideas are not 'protected' but what is? Any subject is open to > > > ridicule, humour, parody. Nothing is sacred when it comes to being > > > satirized or derided. > > > > > > > It doesn't matter in archeology what the discoverer feels about an > > > > artifact. He has to make his case on the content of the ideas. > > > > > > I am not sure where this sentence falls into the discussion, but, okay. > > > > > > > > You seem unable in discussion to make this distinction between what is > > > > going on inside your imagination (Curtis is feeling hate and anger > > > > while writing) and WHAT I am actually saying. > > > > > > > > > > > Similarly, you give a pass on Ravi painting a picture of a whole race > > > > of people as having babies for food stamps while the shiftless men are > > > > in jail because you give more weight to what you IMAGINE is going on > > > > inside his feelings. So you can ignore WHAT he says because of how you > > > > feel about him. > > > > > > > > When it comes to racist ideas what counts to me is WHAT is said. So I > > > > challenged WHAT he said as an over-generalization about a race. I asked > > > > him to consider what percentage he believes fit his characterization. I > > > > am not attacking his feelings. > > > > > > Well, you can attack his feelings all you want and at the same time > > > discuss where they are coming from as well. I think by questioning > > > someone's statements you are questioning their beliefs which in turn is > > > questioning them as individuals. You can't really isolate one out from > > > the other, it comes as a package. It's just the way it is. > > > > > > > > > > > When I write something satirical about religion, you could go after the > > > > ideas and make a case for a different POV. > > > > > > > > But you don't. What you do is imagine what I am feeling and then try to > > > > characterize me as expression emotions you are imagining I am having. > > > > > > See above for why I disagree with this assertion of yours. > > > > > > > > You can't discuss ideas without going after me as a person, which is > > > > why we have so few interactions here. > > > > > > I actually really disagree with you here. It may end up feeling like I am > > > going after your innate personhood but remember what we believe or > > > subscribe to in our lives is often so closely adhered to our sense of > > > self and the very fabric of what we feel makes us up as human beings that > > > it becomes difficult to separate out when someone else questions our > > > actions/writings/viewpoints. I think you may be having that difficulty > > > with me. > > > > > > Let me just say this as a general overview: I don't care what you or > > > anyone else believes or feels about Christ, the song or TM. But what I > > > can object to is how they talk about some of these things or use them to > > > attack or horrify/shock. I can be offended by what I feel may be crossing > > > the line or in bad taste (very subjective, both of these things) or just > > > plain ignorant. I may or may not say so at the time. Often when we bring > > > these kinds of objections up we are met with ugly defensiveness that > > > closes any door to meaningful discussion. That is not the purpose I see > > > of this forum. I like the chance to discuss differing outlooks and > > > opinions but so much of it here seems to go down the toilet bowl of > > > reaction and negativity based on people taking things as personal attacks > > > when all the other guy wants to do is discuss the differences in > > > viewpoint. I could have a very strong opinion about something and bring > > > it to the attention of the writer but it is because I want to discuss the > > > subject. Unfortunately, some here either refuse to discuss things at all > > > or take the entire subject or use another subject altogether to berate > > > someone. Example: Nabby attempting to use his supposed disdain of your > > > music as a weapon against you or Steve taking Ravi's past relationship > > > and trying to harpoon him with it. > > > > > > Now, have you felt personally attacked in this post of mine? I certainly > > > hope not. If so, I will have to really examine my writing style. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I figured you'd get back to me so I guess I have to keep going with > > > > > this. I have snipped a bunch of the older stuff so we don't clog up > > > > > the works. > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Ann" <awoelflebater@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > > > > > > > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ravi Chivukula > > > > > > > > <chivukula.ravi@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hilarious stuff Curtis - ever ready for your hypocritical, > > > > > > > > > malicious, > > > > > > > > > devious spin aren't you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > First off it was should have been quite clear that I was > > > > > > > > > allowing freedom > > > > > > > > > for artistic expression yet not supporting it as a > > > > > > > > > prescription, not > > > > > > > > > supporting the incredible lengths you go to support > > > > > > > > > derogatory references> to women and gang-rape. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What part of the song represents a derogatory reference to > > > > > > > > woman and gang rape to you Ravi? Show me one line to support > > > > > > > > that interpretation. Even my first graders know that they have > > > > > > > > to support their POV with a detail from the text. Let's see if > > > > > > > > you can clear the first grade level bar for justifying your POV > > > > > > > > about the song. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You have been mislead by watching Raunchy fly off the handle > > > > > > > > with her projections onto the characters in the lyrics haven't > > > > > > > > you? You really don't have anything in the actual words of the > > > > > > > > song to support this absurd accusation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What makes you spin me as an Indian Sean Hannity and not an > > > > > > > > > artist - an > > > > > > > > > Indian stand up?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well for one thing stand-up makes the audience laugh. If you > > > > > > > > were going for laughter doing schtick on what a republican > > > > > > > > asshole would say about black people you lacked a set-up as a > > > > > > > > minimum. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So is that what you are claiming about your observations about > > > > > > > > black people and their food stamp lov'n, baby factory ways? > > > > > > > > Was it a joke? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh dear, I was hoping to be able to bypass this entire > > > > > > > conversation but it appears I need to mention just one teeny > > > > > > > weeny reference to your Christ spiels, be they Christmas or > > > > > > > Easter versions. If you want, we could start quoting and > > > > > > > analyzing those. I think, at the time anyway, you thought they > > > > > > > were 'jokes', funny, creative and also attractive to the silent > > > > > > > lurkers/friends of yours who read FFL to see your written gags > > > > > > > because they are so original and hilarious. Although I was not > > > > > > > entirely on board with Ravi's 'observations' of the black > > > > > > > population in America I am not sure YOU are the one to start > > > > > > > pointing fingers with regard to someone else denigrating entire > > > > > > > populations when you appear to feel so much satisfaction at > > > > > > > dishing it out about Jesus, the Virgin Mary and God, for that > > > > > > > matter. Whether we are talking about interpreting song lyrics, > > > > > > > discussing one's opinions on a culture or another's 'stand up' > > > > > > > routine about one of the 'Holier Families' in Christian belief > > > > > > > structure it can all come down to a serious case of subjectivity. > > > > > > > Just don't be a hypocrite, that's all I'm sayin'. > > > > > > > > > > > > So you are equating my mocking beliefs in mythologies with racist > > > > > > comments about a group of actual people who are born into a race? > > > > > > You seriously can't make this distinction between ideas and people? > > > > > > > > > > Well, first of all the entire subject of mythology or not is not a > > > > > foregone conclusion so don't start this whole thing off asserting the > > > > > the entire Christ story is one big myth. If this is the premise of > > > > > why you don't like what I wrote then this is a bad start. > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe this will help: > > > > > > > > > > > > Magic Jesus: Not real. Mary not a virgin. These ideas are myths and > > > > > > a product of creative writing not unlike my own. > > > > > > > > > > Oh, okay so you are starting with this premise and based on how and > > > > > what you just wrote your last couple of sentences I am not sure you > > > > > are open to a discussion. It is not a good omen for a dialogue > > > > > between two people who would otherwise like to, perhaps, exchange > > > > > ideas. > > > > > > > > > > > > Being born black: very real. They can't wake up one day and say > > > > > > "being black is bullshit, I am not going to buy into that belief > > > > > > anymore and just be white now so I can get all the perks society > > > > > > offers them." > > > > > > > > > > Reeeeaaalllyy. I didn't realize once you were black your skin > > > > > remained that colour. I mean, look at Michael Jackson (not our MJ). > > > > > Just pulling your chain, sorry. > > > > > > > > > > > > And what does not being "entirely on board with Ravi's > > > > > > 'observations' of the black population in America" mean?" Were you > > > > > > a little on board with characterizing a whole population of real > > > > > > people this way? > > > > > > > > > > Curtis, you are suddenly so self righteous I just can't seem to keep > > > > > a straight face or get serious about this post. I had INTENDED to get > > > > > serious but so far you are sort of cracking me up. I know you THINK > > > > > you are the resident expert of black people because you live in the > > > > > south but come oooonnnn. > > > > > > > > > > > > My original comment linked his views with Sean Hannity who also > > > > > > promotes these images of black people having babies for more food > > > > > > stamps. It is a right wing political agenda that demonizes the > > > > > > poor and black people and has serious policy implications for > > > > > > actual families. > > > > > > > > > > Oh Curtis. > > > > > > > > > > > > So no Ann, it is not hypocritical to make fun of religious ideas > > > > > > and still be against racist remarks. They are not the same. > > > > > > > > > > Ahhh, but the agenda behind, the motivation, the hatred, the > > > > > ignorance and the anger can be. Absolutely. And THAT is what I'm > > > > > talkin' about. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < Why not allow for my artistic, provocative expression > > > > > > > > > similar to how you defend artistic expressions of gang-rape > > > > > > > > > and derogatory> objectification of women?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are too confused about too many things here to straighten > > > > > > > > anything out. But again I give you the challenge to defend > > > > > > > > your accusations about the purpose and meaning of the song from > > > > > > > > actual words FROM the song. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why did your hypocritical ass not defend my attack on > > > > > > > > > Indians? It's > > > > > > > > > probably not in line with your racist, Hindu-bashing White > > > > > > > > > ass is it?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why would I care how you think about Indians? I am not > > > > > > > > professionally preserving Indian culture, I am preserving an > > > > > > > > aspect of black culture. So your idiotic statements about > > > > > > > > black people are more interesting to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember Curtis baby - I can play your game better than you.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ravi you haven't even cleared the bar of coherence, or the > > > > > > > > first grade level of supporting your POV about a work of > > > > > > > > fiction with examples from the text. Let's start there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
