Thomas Bushnell, BSG (thomb) wrote,
Thomas Bushnell, BSG

Today's attack

So my commetns on A Pinch of Salt were deleted (by me), for the simple reason that as soon as I realized the authors had no intention of engaging in an honest discussion, I did not want them to remain.

The author has chosen, however, to continue to beat up on me. Today, we have People living in stone houses throwing glasses. See? I'm in a "stone house" and I'm "throwing glasses". Isn't that clever?

I'm supposedly the same as some other person, because I have the same ideas. "The deletion looked very suspicious to me, especially since I remember having read this story before on weblogs which we can deem near to us. I could not find them back, though. Maybe the interventions were not by mr. Bushnell, or under another name." Nope, I think this is just a matter of different people having similar opinions.

And I must be a bad person, because "he comment was given rather late - it could have gone unnoticed in fact." I first heard about A Pinch of Salt from Alexandre Christoyannopoulos' new book, and thought I'd check it out. I read old posts, and comment on one. Nothing nefarious.

When I said that it is not true that all porn is "embedded with the oppression of women", this was simply because--contrary to the blog's assumption--there is porn which has nothing to do with women. What is suspicious is indeed, any view which AdR doesn't accept. "I do not believe in any liberating form of pornography of any kind." And nothing, absolutely nothing, will get through that. How can we hear from the experiences of other people if we do not listen?

I said that AdR was "unable to hear the voices of gay people in love", which AdR misunderstood. It is AdR who cannot hear with love. (That is, "in love" was intendend as a modifier of "hear", not of "people".) I stand by the statement. AdR's suspicion and labelling of me.

"I did feel forcibly outed, as I thought it necessary to jump to the defense of comrade Mott...Probably the wish to defend a woman against attack will be labeled as heterosexism again. If so, sir, I am a proud heterosexist. You will quote me on that again possibly. " Yes, indeed I will. Since I wasn't attacking "comrade Mott" at all; I have nothing to challenger her words. She spoke of heterosexual porn, and I had nothing--and have nothing--to say on that topic. I wanted to say only that the world is bigger than people may think who are fixated on heterosuxual pornography to the exclusion of all else.

But AdR's habit of attacking me because of the group I'm in knows no bounds. I'm a "white man living on stolen land." AdR's narrative has captured him with some powerful assumptions about the world, assumptions which the big complex world are challenging at every stroke. There is a wonderful send-up of this sort of attitude in C.S. Peirce's "The Fixation of Belief".

What is striking is that this isn't the least bit anarchist. It's good old Marxist: a narrative is constructed, with oppressors and oppressed, and the earnest need to determine with suspicion what is supposed underlying what others say:it cannot be simply that they mean what they say, and they have a point of view we should hear. They must be saying what the say as an attempt to oppress and harm us. In this case, coupled with the usual Marxist nonsense which sees all non-normative sexuality as deviant.
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →
← Ctrl ← Alt
Ctrl → Alt →