Objectivists of Gor
Callisto
two share more than one trait. Cheap nieztchanism about how the strong
should survive and lord it over the weak. Enshrinemente of biological
laws "anti-biological" is Norman's insult while "anti-Life" is Rand's.
The tendency for his characters to rant for pages and pages, a style
of hammering the same thing over and over until you weep for an anvil
to drop on the speaker and resume the action. A devoted following
which enshrines their writings as philosophy. Being read mostly for
the "spicy bits" (Rand's attitudes towards rape are very close to
Norman...)
It might be tempting to say that they were the same writer, that Lange
was the cover that Rand used for her soft core porn (notice how the
Gor books were no longer published after she died... well, a few
couple did, but they had been left in storage and were published
posthumously).
What militates against this belief is the fact that Rand was
pro-technology while Norman was anti. Still one wonders, what would a
Rand/Norman collaboration be like?
(I suspect that I know what a Norman/Rice collaboration be like.
"Prince of Gor" where Tarl Cabot is invited to be made a Prince of her
land by a distant Queen who promises to fulfill his deepest desires.
Turns out that, given the amount of ranting he does each time he
enslaves a woman, and the rationalizing that accompanies the act,
means that he is no true Master,and that his bluster hides a deep need
to be mastered, and that is why no slave can satisfy him. So he is
made a Prince, made to serve the Lords and Ladies of the castle, and
finally finds fulfillment...)
Aaron Brezenski
Callisto <rx...@psu.edu> wrote:
>Posts about Ayn Rand and John Norman has led me to realize that those
>two share more than one trait. Cheap nieztchanism about how the strong
>should survive and lord it over the weak. Enshrinemente of biological
>laws "anti-biological" is Norman's insult while "anti-Life" is Rand's.
>The tendency for his characters to rant for pages and pages, a style
>of hammering the same thing over and over until you weep for an anvil
>to drop on the speaker and resume the action. A devoted following
>which enshrines their writings as philosophy. Being read mostly for
>the "spicy bits" (Rand's attitudes towards rape are very close to
>Norman...)
Hmmm... I've never known anyone who reads Rand for the eroticism.
[shudder]
>It might be tempting to say that they were the same writer, that Lange
>was the cover that Rand used for her soft core porn (notice how the
>Gor books were no longer published after she died... well, a few
>couple did, but they had been left in storage and were published
>posthumously).
>
>What militates against this belief is the fact that Rand was
>pro-technology while Norman was anti. Still one wonders, what would a
>Rand/Norman collaboration be like?
"He signed a pact not to place my S&M fashion designs on any woman
except Dominique, but then he let his joyless inferior tramps wear them.
I had to butcher them all. Look to your hearts: am I not completely
justified?"
I shudder at the thought of a fifty-page monologue on why women
are naturally servile...
--
Aaron Brezenski
Not speaking for my employer in any way.
Brenda W. Clough
> It might be tempting to say that they were the same writer, that Lange
> was the cover that Rand used for her soft core porn (notice how the
> Gor books were no longer published after she died... well, a few
> couple did, but they had been left in storage and were published
> posthumously).
>
> What militates against this belief is the fact that Rand was
> pro-technology while Norman was anti.
Another teeny problem is that Norman is alive, and turns up at East Coast
cons every so often.
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough
Read my novella "May Be Some Time"
Complete at www.analogsf.com
My web page is at http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
David Johnston
>
> Callisto wrote:
>
> > It might be tempting to say that they were the same writer, that Lange
> > was the cover that Rand used for her soft core porn (notice how the
> > Gor books were no longer published after she died... well, a few
> > couple did, but they had been left in storage and were published
> > posthumously).
> >
> > What militates against this belief is the fact that Rand was
> > pro-technology while Norman was anti.
>
> Another teeny problem is that Norman is alive, and turns up at East Coast
> cons every so often.
Nah. We assume that guy is an imposter.
Callisto
> In article <89dcabe3.02020...@posting.google.com>,
> Callisto <rx...@psu.edu> wrote:
> >Posts about Ayn Rand and John Norman has led me to realize that those
> >two share more than one trait. Cheap nieztchanism about how the strong
> >should survive and lord it over the weak. Enshrinemente of biological
> >laws "anti-biological" is Norman's insult while "anti-Life" is Rand's.
> >The tendency for his characters to rant for pages and pages, a style
> >of hammering the same thing over and over until you weep for an anvil
> >to drop on the speaker and resume the action. A devoted following
> >which enshrines their writings as philosophy. Being read mostly for
> >the "spicy bits" (Rand's attitudes towards rape are very close to
> >Norman...)
>
> Hmmm... I've never known anyone who reads Rand for the eroticism.
> [shudder]
>
Actually a lot of women bought them for the sex.... frightening as the
though might be to you.
Callisto
> Callisto wrote:
>
> > It might be tempting to say that they were the same writer, that Lange
> > was the cover that Rand used for her soft core porn (notice how the
> > Gor books were no longer published after she died... well, a few
> > couple did, but they had been left in storage and were published
> > posthumously).
> >
> > What militates against this belief is the fact that Rand was
> > pro-technology while Norman was anti.
>
> Another teeny problem is that Norman is alive, and turns up at East Coast
> cons every so often.
>
> Brenda
Lange was just a front. Notice how he cannot write another book since
the true author is dead and her cache of unpulbished manuscripts (a la
V.C. Andrews) is exhausted.
Next time you see him, tell him of this theory, and see how he reacts.
Arthur D. Hlavaty
The real author has never revealed his identity because his wife would
beat the crap out of him if she knew.
--
Arthur D.Hlavaty hla...@panix.com
Church of the SuperGenius in Wile E. we trust
E-zine available on request
Jens Kilian
> Next time you see him, tell him of this theory, and see how he reacts.
GIF! GIF!
--
mailto:j...@acm.org phone:+49-7031-464-7698 (TELNET 778-7698)
http://www.bawue.de/~jjk/ fax:+49-7031-464-7351
PGP: 06 04 1C 35 7B DC 1F 26 As the air to a bird, or the sea to a fish,
0x555DA8B5 BB A2 F0 66 77 75 E1 08 so is contempt to the contemptible. [Blake]
Per C. Jorgensen
> Posts about Ayn Rand and John Norman has led me to realize that those
> two share more than one trait. Cheap nieztchanism about how the strong
> should survive and lord it over the weak.
I like the parody idea, but -- isn't one of Ayn Rand's recurring themes
not
that the strong should rule the weak, but that the weak shall not rule the
strong (incidentally, she does not much approve of Nietzsche in _For the
New Intellectual, where she puts a lot of famous philosophers in the
'Witch Doctor' or 'Attila' categories, as a kind of high priests forn the
rulers), and that our attitudes about what is beneficial about altruism
and
egoism are clouded with altruist propaganda about the benefits
of altruism?
-- PCJ
(not an objectivist)
Lee DeRaud
When they were first published? Sure.
Now (for that matter, the last thirty years)? I seriously doubt it.
Lee
Kyle Haight
Per C. Jorgensen <p.c.jo...@east-stud.uio.no> wrote:
>Callisto wrote:
>
>> Posts about Ayn Rand and John Norman has led me to realize that those
>> two share more than one trait. Cheap nieztchanism about how the strong
>> should survive and lord it over the weak.
>
>I like the parody idea, but -- isn't one of Ayn Rand's recurring themes
>not that the strong should rule the weak, but that the weak shall not
Indeed. Rand did have a strong Nietzschean affinity particularly in
her earlier writings, but by the time of _The Fountainhead_ she was mostly
beyond that. Gail Wynand was in many respects her final take on the
Nietzschean archetype, and Wynand _failed_. She briefly expressed her
disagreement with Nietzsche in the introduction to the 25th anniversary
edition of _The Fountainhead_.
There are many things to criticize about Rand, but being Nietzschean isn't
really one of them.
ObSFButNotWritten: Am I the only person who lives in fear of the Buffy
episode in which Anya discovers _Atlas Shrugged_?
--
Kyle Haight
kha...@alumni.ucsd.edu
David Johnston
That is pretty much Norman's perspective about sexual equality, that it is
a plot by the weak (women) to control the strong (men)
Mitch Wagner
@psu.edu says...
> Posts about Ayn Rand and John Norman has led me to realize that those
> two share more than one trait. Cheap nieztchanism about how the strong
> should survive and lord it over the weak. Enshrinemente of biological
> laws "anti-biological" is Norman's insult while "anti-Life" is Rand's.
> The tendency for his characters to rant for pages and pages, a style
> of hammering the same thing over and over until you weep for an anvil
> to drop on the speaker and resume the action. A devoted following
> which enshrines their writings as philosophy. Being read mostly for
> the "spicy bits" (Rand's attitudes towards rape are very close to
> Norman...)
I don't know what Norman's attitudes toward rape were, but Rand reacted
with revulsion to the suggestion that her novels eroticized rape. She
said the sex in her novels was most definitely consensual. This most
definitely applied, she said, to the scene in her novels that's most
frequently labelled as rape, the consummation between Dominique Francon
and Howard Roark.
--
Mitch Wagner weblog http://drive.thru.org
Per C. Jorgensen
> That is pretty much Norman's perspective about sexual equality, that it is
> a plot by the weak (women) to control the strong (men)
But Rand was less occupied with who dominates whom than with the
right of all to be free,--
-- PCJ
Lee DeRaud
No worse than Spike getting hooked on soaps. :-)
Lee
Andrew Ducker
news:3C641969...@east-stud.uio.no:
> But Rand was less occupied with who dominates whom than with the
> right of all to be free,--
Tch. Everybody is free.
Andy D
--
http://www.notzen.com/andrew http://andrewducker.livejournal.com
Alex Guggenheim
Glistening Bodybuilders of Gor?
Crusading Feminists of Gor?
Sexual Harassers of Gor?
Sexually Frustrated Nerds of Gor?
Inadequate Men of Gor?
Planned Parenthood of Gor?
Divorce Lawyers of Gor?
Marriage Counsellors of Gor?
Sex Therapists of Gor?
Sororities of Gor?
Pro-Choicers of Gor?
Just a thought...
"Per C. Jorgensen" <p.c.jo...@east-stud.uio.no> wrote in message news:<3C63EEF5...@east-stud.uio.no>...
Joe "Nuke Me Xemu" Foster
> I don't know what Norman's attitudes toward rape were, but Rand reacted
> with revulsion to the suggestion that her novels eroticized rape. She
> said the sex in her novels was most definitely consensual. This most
> definitely applied, she said, to the scene in her novels that's most
> frequently labelled as rape, the consummation between Dominique Francon
> and Howard Roark.
So Ayn Rand was Klingon? That explains much...
--
Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> "Regged" again? <http://www.xenu.net/>
WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!
Aaron Brezenski
Indeed. As Objectivist scholars put it, "If this be rape, then it is
rape by engraved invitation."
I can see their point, but it does put Rand closer to the John Norman
category than I'm sure most O'ists would like.
Jason Larke
>>>>> (Alex Guggenheim) said:
AG> How about Lisping Male Hairdressers of Gor?
I had an exceedingly odd dream last night about the Letter
Openers of Gor. There were big, sharp, silver letter openers who
spent lots of time explaining to terrified envelopes that it was
their fundamental nature to need to be opened.
I blame this thread. My lawyers will be contacting you all.
--
Jason Larke- jla...@uu.net- http://www.nnaf.net/~jlarke Send mail for PGP key
I don't speak for UUNET or MCI Worldcom. I speak for Odin. And he's *pissed*.
Any sufficiently advanced weapon is indistinguishable from a practical joke.
"People change, and smile: but the agony abides."-T.S. Eliot, The Dry Salvages
David Johnston
More accurately with the right of all to be non-altruistic.
But no, I wasn't seriously arguing that the two of them really were
identical in their ideas, just that they possessed one common element,
the belief that modern society brainwashes humans out of their natural
and therefore correct nature.
Sea Wasp
> "He signed a pact not to place my S&M fashion designs on any woman
> except Dominique, but then he let his joyless inferior tramps wear them.
> I had to butcher them all. Look to your hearts: am I not completely
> justified?"
>
And you've just revealed how much of a Randboy you are, given the
source you just quoted. Most people just know AS and/or The
Fountainhead. ;)
> I shudder at the thought of a fifty-page monologue on why women
> are naturally servile...
And if you're of the target audience, a CONVINCING 50-page monologue.
--
Sea Wasp http://www.wizvax.net/seawasp/index.htm
/^\
;;; _Morgantown: The Jason Wood Chronicles_, at
http://www.hyperbooks.com/catalog/20040.html
Sea Wasp
>
> rx...@psu.edu (Callisto) writes:
> > Next time you see him, tell him of this theory, and see how he reacts.
>
> GIF! GIF!
No, Quicktime Video!
Sea Wasp
>
> ObSFButNotWritten: Am I the only person who lives in fear of the Buffy
> episode in which Anya discovers _Atlas Shrugged_?
Oh... my... GOD. Now I have to go have my brain pressed and ironed.
Better, I suppose, than having had GLORY discover it. Imagine it,
instead of her blonde bimbo psycho impersonation, we'd have had entire
episodes of her monologues.
Sea Wasp
>
> "Mitch Wagner" <mwa...@TheWorld.com> wrote in message <news:MPG.16cdb6af4...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>...
>
> > I don't know what Norman's attitudes toward rape were, but Rand reacted
> > with revulsion to the suggestion that her novels eroticized rape. She
> > said the sex in her novels was most definitely consensual. This most
> > definitely applied, she said, to the scene in her novels that's most
> > frequently labelled as rape, the consummation between Dominique Francon
> > and Howard Roark.
>
> So Ayn Rand was Klingon? That explains much...
"You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have read it in
the original Klingon."
Kyle Haight
>
> "You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have read it in
>the original Klingon."
Ow. I am brutally repaid for my upthread Buffy/Rand post.
--
Kyle Haight
kha...@alumni.ucsd.edu
Kyle Haight
Aaron Brezenski <apbr...@fm.intel.com> wrote:
>
>Indeed. As Objectivist scholars put it, "If this be rape, then it is
>rape by engraved invitation."
I have a vague recollection that the "rape by engraved invitation" line
was actually from Rand herself, but I don't have a cite.
>I can see their point, but it does put Rand closer to the John Norman
>category than I'm sure most O'ists would like.
I know a lot of O'ists who think Rand's take on sexual psychology was,
shall we say, deeply flawed. Frankly I have yet to meet a single one
who agreed with her argument on why no rational woman would want to be
POTUS.
--
Kyle Haight
kha...@alumni.ucsd.edu
David Cowie
> How about Lisping Male Hairdressers of Gor?
>
> Glistening Bodybuilders of Gor?
> Crusading Feminists of Gor?
> Sexual Harassers of Gor?
> Sexually Frustrated Nerds of Gor?
> Inadequate Men of Gor?
> Planned Parenthood of Gor?
> Divorce Lawyers of Gor?
> Marriage Counsellors of Gor?
> Sex Therapists of Gor?
> Sororities of Gor?
> Pro-Choicers of Gor?
>
> Just a thought...
>
Xena, Warrior Princess of Gor.
--
David Cowie
There is no _spam in my address.
"You had to do WHAT with your seat?"
Aaron Brezenski
>Aaron Brezenski wrote:
>
>> "He signed a pact not to place my S&M fashion designs on any woman
>> except Dominique, but then he let his joyless inferior tramps wear them.
>> I had to butcher them all. Look to your hearts: am I not completely
>> justified?"
> And you've just revealed how much of a Randboy you are, given the
>source you just quoted. Most people just know AS and/or The
>Fountainhead. ;)
Rats. Is it that obvious? I try to hide it. The Bassior once chastised me for
criticizing a philosophy I "obviously [knew] nothing about".
I was President of the Northwestern University parish^H^H^H^H^H^Hchapter of
the Students of Objectivism in my second year of college. I was soon
fairly disillusioned when it became apparent that the other members of the
organization were not interested in discussing the various issues which the
philosophy raised, but were just interested in renting tapes and inviting
speakers from the Ayn Rand Institute and listening to the sermons therein.
I had serious issues with various portions of the philosophy from the
outset: the whole heroism/worship-of-heroism aspect of the masculinity/femininity
axis, the bizarre "my tastes in art/music/sex are an inherent part of my
philosophy" thing, and the apparent antagonism towards parts of science which
seemed "unobjective"-- like quantum physics. Attempting to discuss these topics
ran up against the wall of dogma, and I eventually got tired of being ignored
(that's the Objectivist method of shouting you down, y'see).
I abandoned the Presidency when it became apparent the membership didn't want
to change this behavior, and I stopped attending events when the members would
spend the "after-party" evaluating the latest possible recruits for philosophical
purity (they never called it that, of course). My suggestions that this was the
height of the collectivist bullshit Rand was against were apparently ignored.
I abandoned the "movement" altogether when research demonstrated that Rand
herself not only expelled people from her inner circle for ideological impurity,
but expelled people out of romantic jealousy as well.
Rand said some important things about the value of an individual, and the
supremacy of the human will; she said equally interesting things regarding
politics and economics. It didn't occur to me until later in life that I
only found her philosophy so intriguing because it happened to agree with mine
on so many levels; but fundamental differences in the way I thought (and still
think) about gender, art, and sex made it impossible for a real match.
That and I wanted to meet chicks. Lots of cute chicks. And the O'ist chicks
were just too passive for me. Yuck.
Aaron Brezenski
Kyle Haight <kha...@olagrande.net> wrote:
>
>ObSFButNotWritten: Am I the only person who lives in fear of the Buffy
>episode in which Anya discovers _Atlas Shrugged_?
I so wish I knew Joss Whedon, if only so I could give him this idea.
It would generate an entire season-worth of humor.
Omri Schwarz
Though Andrews's case might wind up requiring the
use of wooden stakes and garlic.
> Next time you see him, tell him of this theory, and see how he reacts.
--
Omri Schwarz --- ocs...@mit.edu ('h' before war)
Timeless wisdom of biomedical engineering: "Noise is principally
due to the presence of the patient." -- R.F. Farr
Ross TenEyck
>I don't know what Norman's attitudes toward rape were, but Rand reacted
>with revulsion to the suggestion that her novels eroticized rape. She
>said the sex in her novels was most definitely consensual. This most
>definitely applied, she said, to the scene in her novels that's most
>frequently labelled as rape, the consummation between Dominique Francon
>and Howard Roark.
Hm. It's been a long time since I read that book, but I don't
recall the part where Dominique said, "OK, sure."
Perhaps she really didn't mind Roark breaking into her bedroom,
throwing her down on her bed, and having his way with her --
but Roark had no way of knowing that, unless he was supposed
to have intuited it somehow.
I read the book in high school -- one of my teachers had pointed
out to me a scholarship competition based on essays on _The
Fountainhead_ -- and I remember being baffled by the part where
Dominique tells Roark that she's going to do her best to ruin
him; and every time she's successful at denying him a contract
or something, she will come to him so he can "erase my victory
with your hands on my body."
I think my reaction at the time was something like, "My god...
this isn't how women actually think, is it?" (I was in high
school; my experience was limited.) Fortunately, experience
proved that women as f*cked up as Dominique are the exception.
(Also men f*cked up enough to go along with it.)
By the time I got to the line in _Atlas Shrugged_ where it says
that Dagny wearing the bracelet of Rearden metal had "the most
feminine of looks, that of being chained," (or words to that
effect), I had learned enough to merely roll my eyes.
--
================== http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~teneyck ==================
Ross TenEyck Seattle, WA \ Light, kindled in the furnace of hydrogen;
ten...@alumni.caltech.edu \ like smoke, sunlight carries the hot-metal
Are wa yume? Soretomo maboroshi? \ tang of Creation's forge.
Bill Snyder
wrote:
[snip discussion of student Objectivist society]
>That and I wanted to meet chicks. Lots of cute chicks. And the O'ist chicks
>were just too passive for me. Yuck.
You mean, "Lie still and think of Galt" doesn't work?
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank.]
Aaron Brezenski
You've been luckier than I, then; the only O'ists I've known who were
willing to disagree with The Holy Writ (and not merely the Papal Bull
from Laguna) soon hung their large Os on a shelf and left it there.
Karl Elvis MacRae
>Kyle Haight wrote:
>
>>
>> ObSFButNotWritten: Am I the only person who lives in fear of the Buffy
>> episode in which Anya discovers _Atlas Shrugged_?
>
> Oh... my... GOD. Now I have to go have my brain pressed and ironed.
>
> Better, I suppose, than having had GLORY discover it. Imagine it,
>instead of her blonde bimbo psycho impersonation, we'd have had entire
>episodes of her monologues.
"Run Away! Run Away!"
-Karl
--
Karl Elvis MacRae VLSI CAD Apple Computer km...@apple.com
Karl Elvis MacRae
David Cowie <david_co...@lineone.net> wrote:
>On Friday 08 February 2002 18:48, Alex Guggenheim wrote:
>
>> How about Lisping Male Hairdressers of Gor?
>>
>> Glistening Bodybuilders of Gor?
>> Crusading Feminists of Gor?
>> Sexual Harassers of Gor?
>> Sexually Frustrated Nerds of Gor?
>> Inadequate Men of Gor?
>> Planned Parenthood of Gor?
>> Divorce Lawyers of Gor?
>> Marriage Counsellors of Gor?
>> Sex Therapists of Gor?
>> Sororities of Gor?
>> Pro-Choicers of Gor?
>>
>> Just a thought...
>>
>Xena, Warrior Princess of Gor.
Actually, that's kind of hot. =B^)
Aaron Brezenski
Bill Snyder <bsn...@iadfw.net> wrote:
>On 8 Feb 2002 22:01:19 GMT, apbr...@fm.intel.com (Aaron Brezenski)
>wrote:
>
>[snip discussion of student Objectivist society]
>
>>That and I wanted to meet chicks. Lots of cute chicks. And the O'ist chicks
>>were just too passive for me. Yuck.
>
>You mean, "Lie still and think of Galt" doesn't work?
I'm sure that would work, but why would you want your partner just lying there?
(yes, I caught the reference. but still...)
Bill Snyder
wrote:
>In article <6A8D70721F194B13.9FED6BDB...@lp.airnews.net>,
>Bill Snyder <bsn...@iadfw.net> wrote:
>>On 8 Feb 2002 22:01:19 GMT, apbr...@fm.intel.com (Aaron Brezenski)
>>wrote:
>>
>>[snip discussion of student Objectivist society]
>>
>>>That and I wanted to meet chicks. Lots of cute chicks. And the O'ist chicks
>>>were just too passive for me. Yuck.
>>
>>You mean, "Lie still and think of Galt" doesn't work?
>
>I'm sure that would work, but why would you want your partner just lying there?
>
>(yes, I caught the reference. but still...)
You're saying you may have stumbled across the magick formula to Get
Chicks, back when you were a horny college kid -- but you didn't
actually try it out? Doesn't sound like enlightened self-interest to
me.
Callisto
Anita Blake, Vampire Exectioner of Gor...
> -Karl
Klyfix
>
>Kyle Haight wrote:
>
>>
>> ObSFButNotWritten: Am I the only person who lives in fear of the Buffy
>> episode in which Anya discovers _Atlas Shrugged_?
>
> Oh... my... GOD. Now I have to go have my brain pressed and ironed.
>
> Better, I suppose, than having had GLORY discover it. Imagine it,
>instead of her blonde bimbo psycho impersonation, we'd have had entire
>episodes of her monologues.
>
Oh goodness, that would have been truly horrific.
Buffy: "Okay, okay; take Dawn! Just please Shut Up!!!"
V. S. Greene : kly...@aol.com : Boston, near Arkham...
Eckzylon: http://m1.aol.com/klyfix/eckzylon.html
Fear The Pretzels Of Death
Mitch Wagner
Foster" <j...@bftsi0.UUCP> says...
> "Mitch Wagner" <mwa...@TheWorld.com> wrote in message <news:MPG.16cdb6af4...@News.CIS.DFN.DE>...
>
> > I don't know what Norman's attitudes toward rape were, but Rand reacted
> > with revulsion to the suggestion that her novels eroticized rape. She
> > said the sex in her novels was most definitely consensual. This most
> > definitely applied, she said, to the scene in her novels that's most
> > frequently labelled as rape, the consummation between Dominique Francon
> > and Howard Roark.
>
> So Ayn Rand was Klingon? That explains much...
Um, actually, yeah, something like that.
--
Mitch Wagner weblog http://drive.thru.org
Callisto
(aside speculation)
Actually, Anita Blake, transported to Gor, opens a whole can of worms.
There are no vampire, werewolves, trolls, gargoyles, etc. etc. that
feast on humans. Her presence, from a dimension that has them opens
the door for all of them, to an human population that is totally
ignorant of the threat. They find that much more to their liking than
an Earth that knows about them and has learned to control them (to a
point).
Of course, when the humans start dying the Priest-Kings beguin to
worry about their cattle, and how their supply of meat is endangered
(why do you think they set up that nice planet, anyway?) so they have
to Take Measures...
> > -Karl
Sea Wasp
>
> On Fri, 08 Feb 2002 20:46:06 GMT, Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > "You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have read it in
> >the original Klingon."
>
Only if you use it in my enlightened self-interest! ;)
Karen Lofstrom
> "You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have read it in
> the original Klingon."
I plant my flag and claim this for my sigfile.
--
Karen Lofstrom lofs...@lava.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ta hifo ki liku 'o tou siale
Kakala nanamu ke tui tavale
Sea Wasp
>
> In article <3C6439...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
>
> > "You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have read it in
> > the original Klingon."
>
> I plant my flag and claim this for my sigfile.
From an objectivist point of view, you must offer me something of
equal value. Or to put it in a more Klingon way,
"If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
of my family!"
mstemper - emis . com
>Another teeny problem is that Norman is alive, and turns up at East Coast
>cons every so often.
Yeah, that does sound like a problem.
Bummer.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
If we aren't supposed to eat animals, why are they made from meat?
Karen Lofstrom
> "If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
> of my family!"
Hmmm. Until recently, I thought that crediting the authors was the right
thing to do. Then I got an email from someone, asking that I take his name
OFF one of my sigs, as it was creating spurious hits when he googled for
his name.
Wurra wurra wurra. Life is sooo complex.
--
Karen Lofstrom lofs...@lava.net
----------------------------------------------------------
"You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have
read it in the original Klingon." -- Sea Wasp
William Clifford
> In article <3C66C4...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
>
>> "If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
>> of my family!"
>
> Hmmm. Until recently, I thought that crediting the authors was the right
> thing to do. Then I got an email from someone, asking that I take his name
> OFF one of my sigs, as it was creating spurious hits when he googled for
> his name.
>
> Wurra wurra wurra. Life is sooo complex.
--
| William Clifford | wo...@yahoo.com | http://wobh.home.mindspring.com |
|"I find in favor of your claim, in newsgroup style justice. However |
| I also find completely in favor of myself." |
| --"philipm" in <JEZ78.134$Gv3.1...@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net> |
Sea Wasp
>
> In article <3C66C4...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
>
> > "If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
> > of my family!"
>
> Hmmm. Until recently, I thought that crediting the authors was the right
> thing to do. Then I got an email from someone, asking that I take his name
> OFF one of my sigs, as it was creating spurious hits when he googled for
> his name.
I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's
mostly for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself
mentioned. I can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your
own name, let alone ones that would be interfered with to a great
extent by being used in a .sig.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> "You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have
> read it in the original Klingon." -- Sea Wasp
WOOT!
William T. Hyde
> Karen Lofstrom wrote:
> >
> > In article <3C66C4...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
> >
> > > "If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
> > > of my family!"
> >
> > Hmmm. Until recently, I thought that crediting the authors was the right
> > thing to do. Then I got an email from someone, asking that I take his name
> > OFF one of my sigs, as it was creating spurious hits when he googled for
> > his name.
>
> I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's
> mostly for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself
> mentioned. I can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your
> own name, let alone ones that would be interfered with to a great
> extent by being used in a .sig.
I had a small item published in a magazine that,
um, kinda forgot to tell me about it. I would not
have asked for payment anyway (at a decent word rate
it would have been about $2), but an email requesting
permission would have been nice. So I checked to see
if any other of my writings were being sold without
my knowledge. Didn't find any, though with a relatively
common name like mine there are many pages to search.
For a real writer this might be a more important
issue, however.
William Hyde
EOS Department
Duke University
Mitch Wagner
> In article <3C66C4...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
>
> > "If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
> > of my family!"
>
> Hmmm. Until recently, I thought that crediting the authors was the right
> thing to do. Then I got an email from someone, asking that I take his name
> OFF one of my sigs, as it was creating spurious hits when he googled for
> his name.
>
> Wurra wurra wurra. Life is sooo complex.
That was me. Sorry to have confused you.
You're forgetting the other reason I have for asking you to take my name
off the quote: I don't think the joke was original to me, I think a
friend of mine came up with it.
--
Mitch Wagner weblog http://drive-thru.org
Mitch Wagner
> Karen Lofstrom wrote:
> >
> > In article <3C66C4...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
> >
> > > "If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
> > > of my family!"
> >
> > Hmmm. Until recently, I thought that crediting the authors was the right
> > thing to do. Then I got an email from someone, asking that I take his name
> > OFF one of my sigs, as it was creating spurious hits when he googled for
> > his name.
>
> I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's
> mostly for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself
> mentioned. I can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your
> own name,
Sea Wasp, I google for my name because I occasionally find out that way
that people are talking about me. I'm a low-grade public figure - so
low-grade that probably you haven't heard of me - I'm a computer trade
journalist, and I run a weblog which gets a few hits every day from
people I never heard of.
Sure, there's ego gratification for me to google for myself, but it's
also professional PR.
> let alone ones that would be interfered with to a great
> extent by being used in a .sig.
In two words: false positives.
David Johnston
The main reason to google for your own name is to find out if anyone
responded to a message of yours and you missed it.
Ray Blaak
> I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's mostly
> for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself mentioned. I
> can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your own name, let alone
> ones that would be interfered with to a great extent by being used in a .sig.
The primary reason I google myself is to track responses to threads I am
participating in, when my own servers seem to be missing articles.
Anyway, its a wierd verb: To google. Hey google that guy! I lock myself in and
google myself. Have you ever been googled?
I have decided however, that I would much rather google than live in deja-news.
--
Cheers, The Rhythm is around me,
The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak The Rhythm is inside me,
bl...@telus.net The Rhythm has my soul.
Eric Walker
>Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> writes:
>> I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's mostly
>> for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself mentioned. I
>> can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your own name, let alone
>> ones that would be interfered with to a great extent by being used in a .sig.
>
>The primary reason I google myself is to track responses to threads I am
>participating in, when my own servers seem to be missing articles.
>
>Anyway, its a wierd verb: To google. Hey google that guy! I lock myself in and
>google myself. Have you ever been googled?
>
>I have decided however, that I would much rather google than live in deja-news.
Not really relevant, but I've been waiting years, maybe
decades, for a chance to inflict it on someone else:
Do you like Kipling?
I'm not sure--I 've never kippled.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker, webmaster
Great Science-Fiction & Fantasy Works
http://owlcroft.com/sfandf
Ian Braidwood
> Not really relevant, but I've been waiting years, maybe
> decades, for a chance to inflict it on someone else:
>
> Do you like Kipling?
>
> I'm not sure--I 've never kippled.
Does everyone know that Muffin the mule is illegal? :-)
(-: Ian :-)
Robert Carnegie
> Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> writes:
> > I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that
> > it's mostly for the sterile and self-important wankery of
> > seeing myself mentioned. I can't think of too many USEFUL
> > reasons to google for your own name, let alone ones that
> > would be interfered with to a great extent by being used
> > in a .sig.
>
> The primary reason I google myself is to track responses to
> threads I am participating in, when my own servers seem to
> be missing articles.
>
> Anyway, its a wierd verb: To google. Hey google that guy!
> I lock myself in and google myself. Have you ever been googled?
>
> I have decided however, that I would much rather google than
> live in deja-news.
www.zdnet.com has developed an interest in "Googlewhacking",
which I don't think I'll try to explain.
About half a dozen people with my name are known to Google;
usually it isn't me. As with AOL the solution may be to add
an arbitrary number to your name.
I recall that F. M. Busby's alien Tilari each have a single
personal name and a serial number, but are addressed by the
name only. I wonder if that would work...
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>I don't know what Norman's attitudes toward rape were, but Rand reacted
>with revulsion to the suggestion that her novels eroticized rape. She
>said the sex in her novels was most definitely consensual. This most
>definitely applied, she said, to the scene in her novels that's most
>frequently labelled as rape, the consummation between Dominique Francon
>and Howard Roark.
I thought her take was different -- that the scene was an allegory
about the meeting of strong minds, or some such. She accused those
who took the rape scene to be, well, a rape, of excessive literalism.*
*My own view is more simple: Rand liked to be dominated, and the scene
was an erotic fantasy. Of course, the fact that one might have an
erotic fantasy about being raped doesn't necessarily mean one actually
wants to be raped, any more than John Barnes really wants to have a
shoe shoved up his ass.
--
Pete McCutchen
Pete McCutchen
>In article <3C6439...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
>
>> "You cannot truly appreciate Atlas Shrugged until you have read it in
>> the original Klingon."
>
>I plant my flag and claim this for my sigfile.
I think that about half a dozen people are now claiming it.
--
Pete McCutchen
Sea Wasp
>
> On 12-Feb-2002, Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> wrote:
>
> > I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's
> > mostly for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself
> > mentioned. I can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your
> > own name, let alone ones that would be interfered with to a great
> > extent by being used in a .sig.
>
The more fool them.
Aaron Brezenski
>
> I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's
>mostly for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself
>mentioned. I can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your
>own name, let alone ones that would be interfered with to a great
>extent by being used in a .sig.
Well, you might consider it self-important wankery of a sort, but about
once a year I google myself and read my old Usenet posts, especially my
college-age rantings.
I always find it entertaining, and an excellent exercise in humility.
Jason Bontrager
>
> Does everyone know that Muffin the mule is illegal? :-)
>
> (-: Ian :-)
Do you know the Muffin Man?
Jason B.
David E. Siegel
I can see searching for ones own name to find responses to ones posts
which may have been missed in long threads.
-DES
Lee Ann Rucker
<apbr...@fm.intel.com> wrote:
> Well, you might consider it self-important wankery of a sort, but about
> once a year I google myself and read my old Usenet posts, especially my
> college-age rantings.
Once a year?
You mean, you could do this *before* Google expanded the archives back
to 1981?
(grumble make me feel old grumble)
I wonder if anyone's planning Compuserve archives?
David Tate
> Not really relevant, but I've been waiting years, maybe
> decades, for a chance to inflict it on someone else:
>
> Do you like Kipling?
>
> I'm not sure--I 've never kippled.
Surely the au courant version of this is "Do you like Rowling?"...
David Tate
Michael S. Schiffer
<130220021932106666%lru...@mac.com>:
>In article <a4e7h4$c...@news.or.intel.com>, Aaron Brezenski
><apbr...@fm.intel.com> wrote:
>> Well, you might consider it self-important wankery of a sort, but
>> about once a year I google myself and read my old Usenet posts,
>> especially my college-age rantings.
>Once a year?
>You mean, you could do this *before* Google expanded the archives
>back to 1981?
Whereas I still can't (at least for my college-age rantings). The dates
overlap, but the 80's archive is apparently just incomplete enough to
have dropped almost all of my posts. Granted, this may be a mercy.
(And this should in no way be taken as a criticism of Google. They, and
Henry Spencer and the other contributors, did what they could, and even
incomplete the archive is a major achievement.)
>(grumble make me feel old grumble)
>I wonder if anyone's planning Compuserve archives?
How about "random early-80's BBS postings from across the country"
archives. :-)
Mike
--
Michael S. Schiffer, LHN, FCS
msch...@condor.depaul.edu
Tom Scudder
The Muffin Man?
Eric Walker
[...]
>Among filkers, "to kipple" is to put Kipling's verse to music. I have
>heard some people use the verb to refer to putting other great non-lyric
>authors' verse to music, as well.
Egad.
| What Would Miles Do?
|
|
Isn't he dead? But he played a _mean_ horn.
Robert Carnegie
> >
> > Does everyone know that Muffin the mule is illegal? :-)
>
The Muffin Man?
Eric Walker
The Muffin Man.
(Next line begins with "O . . . " I believe.)
Jens Kilian
> On 14 Feb 2002 01:03:38 -0800, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
> >Jason Bontrager <jab...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in message news:<3C6AA829...@mail.utexas.edu>...
> >> Ian Braidwood wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Does everyone know that Muffin the mule is illegal? :-)
> >>
> >> Do you know the Muffin Man?
> >
> >The Muffin Man?
>
> The Muffin Man.
>
> (Next line begins with "O . . . " I believe.)
IIRC, "Who lives in Drury Lane?"
--
mailto:j...@acm.org phone:+49-7031-464-7698 (TELNET 778-7698)
http://www.bawue.de/~jjk/ fax:+49-7031-464-7351
PGP: 06 04 1C 35 7B DC 1F 26 As the air to a bird, or the sea to a fish,
0x555DA8B5 BB A2 F0 66 77 75 E1 08 so is contempt to the contemptible. [Blake]
Andrew Ducker
news:sf6650q...@bstde026.germany.agilent.com:
> "Eric Walker" <ra...@owlcroft.com> writes:
>
>> On 14 Feb 2002 01:03:38 -0800, Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>> >Jason Bontrager <jab...@mail.utexas.edu> wrote in message
>> >news:<3C6AA829...@mail.utexas.edu>...
>> >> Ian Braidwood wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Does everyone know that Muffin the mule is illegal? :-)
>> >>
>> >> Do you know the Muffin Man?
>> >
>> >The Muffin Man?
>>
>> The Muffin Man.
>>
>> (Next line begins with "O . . . " I believe.)
>
> IIRC, "Who lives in Drury Lane?"
Bzzt.
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/rhymes/Muffinman.shtml
Andy D
--
http://www.notzen.com/andrew http://andrewducker.livejournal.com
Sea Wasp
>
> Lee Ann Rucker <lru...@mac.com> wrote in
> <130220021932106666%lru...@mac.com>:
>
> >In article <a4e7h4$c...@news.or.intel.com>, Aaron Brezenski
> ><apbr...@fm.intel.com> wrote:
>
> >> Well, you might consider it self-important wankery of a sort, but
> >> about once a year I google myself and read my old Usenet posts,
> >> especially my college-age rantings.
>
> >Once a year?
>
> >You mean, you could do this *before* Google expanded the archives
> >back to 1981?
>
> Whereas I still can't (at least for my college-age rantings). The dates
> overlap, but the 80's archive is apparently just incomplete enough to
> have dropped almost all of my posts. Granted, this may be a mercy.
> (And this should in no way be taken as a criticism of Google. They, and
> Henry Spencer and the other contributors, did what they could, and even
> incomplete the archive is a major achievement.)
Same here. I know I made at least a few posts well before '91 (when I
started posting from Pittsburgh), but nothing shows up earlier than
that.
Aaron Brezenski
Lee Ann Rucker <lru...@mac.com> wrote:
>In article <a4e7h4$c...@news.or.intel.com>, Aaron Brezenski
><apbr...@fm.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, you might consider it self-important wankery of a sort, but about
>> once a year I google myself and read my old Usenet posts, especially my
>> college-age rantings.
>
>Once a year?
>
>You mean, you could do this *before* Google expanded the archives back
>to 1981?
>
>(grumble make me feel old grumble)
Heh. Yeah, I was on the Usenet in college from 1993 until 1995, so even when
Dejagoogle went back to April of 1994 I had stuff to read.
David T. Bilek
wrote:
Hah! I knew I recognized your name.
Still a card carrying member of the Illuminati?
-David
(merle.acns.nwu.edu)
Aaron Brezenski
Not from this account, alas, and my stupid Primenet account will no longer
allow me to access their news server with trn (although it works fine with
Nichtscape and Internet Exploder for whatever reason).
Always a pleasure to see someone from Ye Olde Alma Mater, though. :)
Keith F. Lynch
> The primary reason I google myself is to track responses to threads
> I am participating in, when my own servers seem to be missing articles.
AOL. Except that I sometimes forget which newsgroups I have posted
in lately. (I've posted in several hundred over the years.) And
sometimes someone mentions me or one of my web pages in a newsgroup
I've never been to.
> Anyway, its a wierd verb: To google. Hey google that guy! I lock
> myself in and google myself. Have you ever been googled?
There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
routinely done this.
--
Keith F. Lynch - k...@keithlynch.net - http://keithlynch.net/
I always welcome replies to my e-mail, postings, and web pages, but
unsolicited bulk e-mail (spam) is not acceptable. Please do not send me
HTML, "rich text," or attachments, as all such email is discarded unread.
Ray Blaak
> There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
> mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
> since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
> routinely done this.
Ah. I remember that one. I haven't seen that since ... 1993 :-).
Language changes. I think "googling" has a qualitative difference in meaning,
due to the youth of the google site, its execellent search abilities and
performance.
Alan Gore
>The primary reason I google myself is to track responses to threads I am
>participating in, when my own servers seem to be missing articles.
If your ISP were "Qworst", autogoogling becomes standard procedure.
Half my posts just disappear, or they make it but I don't see them, or
I see replies to other posts I never saw in the first place.
ag...@qwest.net | "Giving money and power to the government
Alan Gore | is like giving whiskey and car keys
Software For PC's, Inc. | to teenaged boys" - P. J. O'Rourke
http://www.alangore.com
Jens Kilian
> Jens Kilian <Jens_...@agilent.com> wrote in
> news:sf6650q...@bstde026.germany.agilent.com:
>
> Bzzt.
>
> http://www.enchantedlearning.com/rhymes/Muffinman.shtml
Thanks for the link. (Except for _Shrek_, I never heard it before; English
nursery rhymes are not that well known in Germany ;-)
Nancy Lebovitz
Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>I thought her take was different -- that the scene was an allegory
>about the meeting of strong minds, or some such. She accused those
>who took the rape scene to be, well, a rape, of excessive literalism.*
>
>*My own view is more simple: Rand liked to be dominated, and the scene
>was an erotic fantasy. Of course, the fact that one might have an
>erotic fantasy about being raped doesn't necessarily mean one actually
>wants to be raped, any more than John Barnes really wants to have a
>shoe shoved up his ass.
My own view is just slightly more complex: Rand liked to *imagine* being
dominated. Afaik, her real-world preference was for people she could
shove around.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com www.nancybuttons.com 100 new slogans
Cats are poetry in motion. Dogs are gibberish in high gear.
Sea Wasp
>
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
> > There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
> > mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
> > since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
> > routinely done this.
>
> Ah. I remember that one. I haven't seen that since ... 1993 :-).
Oh, I've seen it since. Not only that, it gave us a good name for
those who did it; Kibozos.
Captain Button
> Ray Blaak wrote:
>>
>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>> > There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
>> > mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
>> > since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
>> > routinely done this.
>>
>> Ah. I remember that one. I haven't seen that since ... 1993 :-).
> Oh, I've seen it since. Not only that, it gave us a good name for
> those who did it; Kibozos.
Are we supposed to sneer at authors who look at the books they wrote
after publication also?
--
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in
tolerance and free speech," - David Brin
Captain Button - but...@io.com
Lawrence Watt-Evans
wrote:
>Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on Fri, 15 Feb 2002 16:01:51
>GMT, Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> wrote:
>> Ray Blaak wrote:
>>>
>>> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>>> > There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
>>> > mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
>>> > since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
>>> > routinely done this.
>>>
>>> Ah. I remember that one. I haven't seen that since ... 1993 :-).
>
>> Oh, I've seen it since. Not only that, it gave us a good name for
>> those who did it; Kibozos.
>
>Are we supposed to sneer at authors who look at the books they wrote
>after publication also?
There are those who do so sneer.
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 11/17/01
My latest novel is THE DRAGON SOCIETY, just published by Tor.
Sea Wasp
>
> Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on Fri, 15 Feb 2002 16:01:51
> GMT, Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> wrote:
> > Ray Blaak wrote:
> >>
> >> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
> >> > There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
> >> > mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
> >> > since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
> >> > routinely done this.
> >>
> >> Ah. I remember that one. I haven't seen that since ... 1993 :-).
>
> > Oh, I've seen it since. Not only that, it gave us a good name for
> > those who did it; Kibozos.
>
> Are we supposed to sneer at authors who look at the books they wrote
> after publication also?
If you take that as a sneer, you're oversensitive.
I call MYSELF a Kibozo when I do it. I find it mildly amusing.
If you take yourself seriously enough to even CARE what people call
you in such a situation, you need to deflate a bit anyway. I've been
called far worse.
Rachel Brown
> *My own view is more simple: Rand liked to be dominated, and the scene
> was an erotic fantasy. Of course, the fact that one might have an
> erotic fantasy about being raped doesn't necessarily mean one actually
> wants to be raped, any more than John Barnes really wants to have a
> shoe shoved up his ass.
That made laugh so unexpectedly that I actually spit on my keyboard.
Just wanted to share...
Rachel
Aaron Brezenski
Nancy Lebovitz <na...@unix1.netaxs.com> wrote:
>In article <cmdk6uc1smndtabsi...@4ax.com>,
>Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>I thought her take was different -- that the scene was an allegory
>>about the meeting of strong minds, or some such. She accused those
>>who took the rape scene to be, well, a rape, of excessive literalism.*
>>
>>*My own view is more simple: Rand liked to be dominated, and the scene
>>was an erotic fantasy. Of course, the fact that one might have an
>>erotic fantasy about being raped doesn't necessarily mean one actually
>>wants to be raped, any more than John Barnes really wants to have a
>>shoe shoved up his ass.
>
>My own view is just slightly more complex: Rand liked to *imagine* being
>dominated. Afaik, her real-world preference was for people she could
>shove around.
I'll try reconciling these views by noting that Rand liked to be dominated
in the bedroom (or so we're given to believe by Nat Branden), but not
outside said bedroom (which is pretty self-evident, looking at her career).
Which is what I think Pete meant, anyway.
phil hunt
>
> I've googled for my own name,
I just assumed everyone did that.
--
===== Philip Hunt ===== ph...@comuno.freeserve.co.uk =====
Herbivore, a zero-effort email encryption system. Details at:
<http://www.vision25.demon.co.uk/oss/herbivore/intro.html>
Captain Button
> In article <cmdk6uc1smndtabsi...@4ax.com>,
> Pete McCutchen <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>I thought her take was different -- that the scene was an allegory
>>about the meeting of strong minds, or some such. She accused those
>>who took the rape scene to be, well, a rape, of excessive literalism.*
>>
>>*My own view is more simple: Rand liked to be dominated, and the scene
>>was an erotic fantasy. Of course, the fact that one might have an
>>erotic fantasy about being raped doesn't necessarily mean one actually
>>wants to be raped, any more than John Barnes really wants to have a
>>shoe shoved up his ass.
> My own view is just slightly more complex: Rand liked to *imagine* being
> dominated. Afaik, her real-world preference was for people she could
> shove around.
Maybe she was just loking for someone who could shove back hard enough
to be worthy....
Which takes us into Red Sonja/Sophia territory and back to the thread
origin.....
Terrell Miller
news:vatr8nv...@anthem.aa.ops.us.uu.net...
> I had an exceedingly odd dream last night about the Letter
> Openers of Gor. There were big, sharp, silver letter openers who
> spent lots of time explaining to terrified envelopes that it was
> their fundamental nature to need to be opened.
sometimes a letter opener is just a letter opener...
--
Terrell Miller
terrel...@mindspring.com
"We think of our life in generalities, but we act out our life in small
decisions"
-Jerry Dodgen
Ed H.
engines concerning my ebook and other websites.
Having a fairly unique last name makes this easy.
Ed Howdershelt - Abintra Press
Science Fiction & Semi-Fiction
http://abintrapress.tripod.com
Ross TenEyck
>I'll try reconciling these views by noting that Rand liked to be dominated
>in the bedroom (or so we're given to believe by Nat Branden), but not
>outside said bedroom (which is pretty self-evident, looking at her career).
I think this also accounts for some of the weirder parts of Rand's
philosophy. (NB: I'm echoing someone else's analysis here, but I
don't remember who. Quite possibly a poster on this group.)
Ayn Rand, apparently, had a kink about being dominated. Nothing
at all wrong with that; lots of people have that kink, or its
converse. However, she also believed that she was a completely
rational person; so it logically followed that her kink was the
rational result of her philosophy. Ergo, all rational women
ought to agree with her and likewise enjoy being dominated in
bed; if they didn't, well, they were wrong. Simple logic.
I think the strain of trying to make the logical connection
between, "I am a strong, self-empowered, intellectual woman,"
and, "Therefore I want you to rough me up in bed," shows pretty
clearly in both _The Fountainhead_ and _Atlas Shrugged._
--
================== http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~teneyck ==================
Ross TenEyck Seattle, WA \ Light, kindled in the furnace of hydrogen;
ten...@alumni.caltech.edu \ like smoke, sunlight carries the hot-metal
Are wa yume? Soretomo maboroshi? \ tang of Creation's forge.
Aaron Brezenski
Ross TenEyck <ten...@alumnae.caltech.edu> wrote:
>apbr...@fm.intel.com (Aaron Brezenski) writes:
>
>>I'll try reconciling these views by noting that Rand liked to be dominated
>>in the bedroom (or so we're given to believe by Nat Branden), but not
>>outside said bedroom (which is pretty self-evident, looking at her career).
>
>I think this also accounts for some of the weirder parts of Rand's
>philosophy. (NB: I'm echoing someone else's analysis here, but I
>don't remember who. Quite possibly a poster on this group.)
>
>Ayn Rand, apparently, had a kink about being dominated. Nothing
>at all wrong with that; lots of people have that kink, or its
>converse. However, she also believed that she was a completely
>rational person; so it logically followed that her kink was the
>rational result of her philosophy. Ergo, all rational women
>ought to agree with her and likewise enjoy being dominated in
>bed; if they didn't, well, they were wrong. Simple logic.
The bizarre part is, Rand acknowledged that there existed values
which were subjective: your appreciation for the color blue, for
instance, over the color red, was not a reflection of your inner
rationality or lack thereof. So an easy out for her, intellectually,
was that this kink was a subjective value and divorced from
rationality.
However, since she saw the act of sex as "affirming your highest
values", she thus placed extra emphasis upon the biological act--
which apparently takes it out of the "values allowed to be
subjective" category. Your choice of partner, therefore, becomes
a reflection of your highest value.
[at this point, I recall the scene from The Illuminatus! Trilogy
wherein Mavis tells George that she's not interested in him,
since she's waiting for someone who fulfills the requirements of
her value system. When, moments later, she's trying to seduce him,
he reminds her of her statement, she says that it's still true,
"but a gal can get awful horny waiting for him to come around".]
I can only assume (because I don't believe it is ever spelled out
anywhere) that the actual acts performed during sex must therefore
reflect your highest values: and since Rand wanted to be used like
a chew toy, she determined that one of her highest values was to
be in utter submissive worship of the person she was with.
Then it's just as you've put it: since one of her highest values
was submission to the One True Man, and she was Rational, all
Rational women must desire submission to the One True Man. Which
is not logically sound, but is a Randian pattern I noticed fairly
early on in my indoc^H^H^H^H^Hstudies in Objectivism.
If you throw out the number of things in her philosophy which
Rand claims she determined through "introspection", it actually
becomes a much more solid, self-consistent framework for life.
It's still lacking in a number of areas (childrearing has been
mentioned), but it's more flexible and realistic without the
including the whim-worship portions she detested in others.
Karen Lofstrom
>> There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
>> mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
>> since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
>> routinely done this.
Piggybacking off another post, since Keith's hasn't arrived here.
Does the *means* make a difference? I think it's harder to grep the
newsspool than to enter a username in the Google search box. Kibozers
would therefore be geekier than autogooglers.
--
Karen Lofstrom lofs...@lava.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A product of Happy People's Recycled Food Cooperative Division Three
Karen Lofstrom
Pete McCutchen wrote:
> I think that about half a dozen people are now claiming it.
Either we work out a sharing agreement or war is inevitable.
Hail, hail Freedonia!
--
Karen Lofstrom lofs...@lava.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT"S A ""K3WL D00D"" AND WH3R3 CAN 1 G3T S0M3!!!!!!!!!!!????????
Keith F. Lynch
> There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
> mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
> since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
> routinely done this.
Ray Blaak <bl...@telus.net> wrote:
> Ah. I remember that one. I haven't seen that since ... 1993 :-).
> Language changes.
Here are the number of uses, according to Google:
1993 33
1994 216
1995 51
1996 32
1997 37
1998 38
1999 50
2000 48
2001 60
2002 23 so far
Not counting this thread, it was most recently used late this morning
(in misc.kids.pregnancy). So if it has fallen out of the language, it
must have done so sometime in the past four hours.
Unfortunately, there's no way to search on "Google" used as a verb.
At least none I can think of.
Martin Soederstroem
wrote:
"googled" gave 4,540 hits for the last year.
"Kibozed" gave 5.
--
Martin
This is not a sig.
Martin Wisse
>Karen Lofstrom wrote:
>>
>> In article <3C66C4...@wizvax.net>, Sea Wasp wrote:
>>
>> > "If you do not credit me with that quote, you have insulted the honor
>> > of my family!"
>>
>> Hmmm. Until recently, I thought that crediting the authors was the right
>> thing to do. Then I got an email from someone, asking that I take his name
>> OFF one of my sigs, as it was creating spurious hits when he googled for
>> his name.
>
> I've googled for my own name, but at least I'll admit that it's
>mostly for the sterile and self-important wankery of seeing myself
>mentioned. I can't think of too many USEFUL reasons to google for your
>own name, let alone ones that would be interfered with to a great
>extent by being used in a .sig.
A quick way to establish who is linking to your sites...
And of course to see whatothers are saying about you.
Martin Wisse
--
Books you've bought and shelved but not yet read emit a gentle, beneficial
radiation, and when you finally do read them they're almost old friends.
-T Nielsen Hayden, Rasseff
Martin Wisse
wrote:
>Andrew Ducker <And...@Ducker.org.uk> writes:
>> Jens Kilian <Jens_...@agilent.com> wrote in
>> news:sf6650q...@bstde026.germany.agilent.com:
>> > IIRC, "Who lives in Drury Lane?"
>>
>> Bzzt.
>>
>> http://www.enchantedlearning.com/rhymes/Muffinman.shtml
>
>Thanks for the link. (Except for _Shrek_, I never heard it before; English
>nursery rhymes are not that well known in Germany ;-)
Of course, in the Dutch version of this rhyme, it's the mussel man, not
the muffin man.
Martin Wisse
>"Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> writes:
>> There's already a perfectly good word for searching Usenet for any
>> mention of yourself: Kiboze. It's been part of the English language
>> since at least 1993. It was named for the first person known to have
>> routinely done this.
>
>Ah. I remember that one. I haven't seen that since ... 1993 :-).
>
>Language changes. I think "googling" has a qualitative difference in meaning,
>due to the youth of the google site, its execellent search abilities and
>performance.
Googling is the general art of looking something up; the correct term
for looking up yourself on the web when you're not Kibo is egosurfing...