Re: Part 1 of Response to: Can you be a Hetero-Man or Woman and Androgynous
BronwenSM
wrote:
>Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
>
> Several problems arise in the way this question is posed. The
>assumptions that sex, sexuality, and gender (yes, these three things
>are different) are some of the primary categories used in forming an
>identity continues to promote the mainstream thinking about what is
>normal and 'ab'-normal. When an indidvidual attempts to use the
>vocabulary of Heterosexist Society to form their sex/sexuality/gender
>parts of their identity/self they immediately fall into the minefield
>maze that traps them within the borders of the language of
>Heterosexism.
<snip>
This may be all very worthwhile, but I'm not sure what it's for. The
header is "Part 1 of Response to: Can you be a Hetero-Man or Woman
and Androgynous" but I can't find the question posed anywhere. Are you
answering someone's question, or writing an essay? It looks like an
essay, or perhaps a sermon.
I don't think you're saying anything vastly controversial, but
personally, I couldn't cope with the style:
"When an indidvidual attempts to use the vocabulary of Heterosexist
Society to form their sex/sexuality/gender parts of their
identity/self they immediately fall into the minefield maze that traps
them within the borders of the language of Heterosexism."
I mean, what kind of sentence is that? Try reading it aloud and you
run out of breath about a third of the way through. If you do read
things aloud to yourself, it often improves your writing
immeasureably.
Bronwen
(If replying by email, just remove my panties to get thru!)
Denny Wheeler
<bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>This may be all very worthwhile, but I'm not sure what it's for.
M'dear, I think it's likely either
(a) a net.kook with delusions of intelligence,
or
(b) an out and out troll.
-denny-
--
Yes, I have time for the dumb shit.
Denny Wheeler
wrote:
>Sorry about the run-on sentences, and yes it is essay style. I just
>finished four years of essay writing for University Honours English.
>I usually do read my stuff out loud, and then edit. I didn't know how
>many people out there would actually be good enough writers to notice
>that kind of thing.
In *this* group? The largish majority of posters here write; a goodly
number of us who don't write, edit.
One needn't be a good writer to recognize bad/flawed/<fitb> writing.
suzee
>
> When I have more time to write I will address the troglodyte that has
> no patience or understanding for new and first time people. I posted
> my stuff in an attempt to connect with people who find sex and gender
> topics that they enjoy talking about in an intelligent manner. I am
> not interested in creating a dialogue with someone who sinks to a
> grade school level of insults and "witty" phrases.
> Thank you BronwenSM for being perceptive and intelligent and kind
> about my efforts, and for recognizing that I am new here. I will
> write more on Saturday when I have more time.
> androgyne30
You mentioned in another post that you're new to Usenet. It's not really
the place for long essays, generally people just post a short comment,
synopsis or exchange of thoughts. So if you could put up your essay on a
website and post a link, it might be more appropriate. Also, this group
is (supposed to be) for writers of sex stories to exchange thoughts and
ideas related to those stories, though we do drift off topic a bit. ;)
There could be other groups that are more related to discussions about
sexuality in general where you could find a better reception of your
ideas.
suzee
androgyne30
to find where it was and repost it with my Response. I didn't mean to
come across with an elitist university ego when I dropped that I just
graduated; the primary reason for mentioning what kind of discourse I
was going to use has to do with my everyday experiences with people.
Many of them have no clue what I am talking about when I use words
with more than three syllables, and they struggle to follow what I am
talking about when I use a Feminist-Gender-Queer Academic Theory
diction. Even when I use mainstream day-to-day diction in a
conversation about gender with most people, they seem to be so
embedded within their Hegemonic heterosexist ideology that they are
unable to think outside the box.
I am going to "start over" with how I introduce the questions,
issues, and ideas I am trying to develope, and be more clear about why
I am posting stuff. I am hoping for an exchange of ideas, and
responses to my ideas. I also don't really know who is posting here
that well, and now that I have a better idea I will be able to adapt
better what I write and how.
Lastly, I believe the case study you refer to that you saw on
Nova refers to David. He was on Oprah two or three times, and is
cited in a great deal of medical literature, psychology textsbooks,
and in general in Gender and Feminist Publications that explore how
physiology is contructed in language and scientific studies. What I
worry about is when the idea is put forward that there are biological,
genetic. or instinctual origins to a person's development and
construction of a gender identity. Yes, we do have very concrete
genitalia, primary sex characteristics and secondary characteristics
as the scientists and textbooks like to label them, but the specific
meanings and mapped out identities given a body with a penis, or a
body with a vagina are NOT universal or global. They exist
temporarily and are embedded within the traditions and politics of the
person's specific location in time and space: what defines "man" in
India in the year 1990 is very different than in the US, and what
"men" wore in the 1600s is very different than today (ie, men wearing
tights now are crossdressing according to mainstream perceptions, but
in previous periods that was the ideal) . . . anyway, I have to go, I
will write more later.
Thanks for taking the time to read my stuff, and to post a
response, I really appreciate it.
HyperTe...@hotmail.com (Tesseract) wrote in message news:<e59c15bf.04111...@posting.google.com>...
> andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30) wrote in message news:<79ca50b2.04111...@posting.google.com>...
>
> Since, in another post, you say you are an English major, I'll try to
> keep to that high level of discourse.
>
> Your subject line makes it sound like you are responding to something
> written by someone else but you don't give us any hint of what that
> is.
>
> > Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
> >
> > Several problems arise in the way this question is posed. The
> > assumptions that sex, sexuality, and gender (yes, these three things
> > are different)
>
> Your parenthetical comment suggest that you believe that some of us
> might believe otherwise. It follows that you should give us your
> definitions just to be clear.
>
> > are some of the primary categories used in forming an
> > identity continues to promote the mainstream thinking about what is
> > normal and 'ab'-normal. When an indidvidual attempts to use the
> > vocabulary of Heterosexist
>
> Using "Heterosexist" rather than "Heterosexual" makes a strong "us
> against them" value judgement rather than just pointing out an
> observation about the majority society.
>
> > Society to form their sex/sexuality/gender
> > parts of their identity/self they immediately fall into the minefield
> > maze that traps them within the borders of the language of
> > Heterosexism.
> > By labelling parts of your personality "feminine" (or
> > "masculine") you bring the crushing weight of centuries of regional
> > cultural and social assumptions into play. Things that are "normal"
> > become naturalized to such an extent that very few people realize how
> > unconscious they are about what they are saying and the impact it has
> > on other people who are different than they are. While not many
> > people will ever read anything written by Judith Butler about her
> > theory that gender is a performance (yes, I know that this is a very
> > limited encapsulation of her theory) but the idea of gender and
> > sexuality as PERFORMED acts opens up a freer way of thinking and
> > speaking about these things--one can no longer be locked into
> > biological essentialims, i.e. "man" and all of the "natural" and
> > 'essential' traits that people believe MUST be PRESENT for one to be
> > called a "man."
>
> Interesting concept.
>
> > One aspect of the concept of Androgyny that destabilizes the
> > beliefs that "man" and "woman" concepts come from biological origins
> > is the combination of opposites within one being or organism.
>
> Nova recently rebroadcast an episode dealing with sexual developement
> and identity. Some of the salient points are that the fetus develops
> as an androgynous creature until about the six week point. Externally
> it has ambiguous features. Internally it has two sets of duct work;
> one would become female sex organs and the other male. At the six week
> point, if the Y chromosome is present, it causes the gonads to produce
> testosterone and related hormones. This causes the male reproductive
> system to develop and the female system to fade. Without testosterone
> the female system develops and the male system fades. Almost all the
> sexual characteristics from this point on are caused by hormones, not
> directly by genetics.
>
> Beyond the reproductive organs, scientists have discovered small but
> noticable differences between male and female brains. They also
> discovered that introducing testosterone caused genetic females to
> develop male characteristics and behaviour, though not completely male
> sex organs. This last experiment was done on rats.
>
> The conclusions reached were that exposure to various sex hormones at
> critical periods of development could interfere with sexual
> development and produce males with female characteristics and females
> with male characteristics. Autopsies done on some transgendered people
> showed they had the brain structure of their desired gender, not their
> gentic gender.
>
> Much of the show dealt with surgically altering the sex organs of a
> genetic male to those of a female. The male toddler lost his penis
> through an accident and this was thought to be the best option at the
> time. It didn't work. As the kid grew up it didn't want to be a girl,
> even though it had the "right" external equipment. By the time it
> reached adulthood it had learned of its history and had reconstructive
> surgery to become male again. (This surgery wasn't available at the
> time of the accident.)
>
> The main point of the show was that even subtle gender issues probably
> have biological origins.
>
>
> > One
> > major problem for Androgynous beings is creating a language in which
> > they can express themselves, and communicate what they are thinking,
> > feeling, doing--who they are--to other people. When one uses terms
> > like masculine and feminine, male and female, in the context of a
> > discussion about who they are, they immediately place themselves
> > (unless they have an audiences that already has learned there are
> > other ways of thinking than Heterosexism) inside the binaries of
> > heterosexist thinking: straight/gay, white/black, normal/abnormal,
> > male/female, etc. If one uses a language system that is based on
> > binaries and dichotomies ("division into two opposed groups or parts")
> > THEY IMPOSE ON THEMSELVES THE "norms" of Heterosexism. If an
> > Androgynous person is feeling "split" or "divided" or like they are an
> > "alien" it is possible that the problem is the language they think and
> > feel with about their SELF and identity is binary. The COMBINATION of
> > OPPOSITES is one of the powerful things about androgyny, it IMPLODES
> > the oppositions and results in the SYNTHESIS or HYBRIDITY of "male"
> > and "female" things--this then necessitates a new language for the
> > hybrid traits and behaviours that appear (and disappear, I believe
> > identity is a fluid thing not concrete).
> > Binaries (paired oppositions)and androgyny do not mix very well.
> > One reason that they fail to cooperate is that mainstream language
> > does not allow mainstream people to understand what they are seeing
> > and hearing when an androgynous person talks or acts in front of them
> > (let alone interact with them). Instead of seeing a "man" acting out
> > a "feminine" behaviour or speaking "like a woman," the androgyne
> > behaviour is translated by the mainstream person's cultural
> > imagination and perception into "gay" or "weird" or whatever other
> > category of "otherness" that comes to mind.
> > In Bert Archer's "The End of Gay (And the death of
> > heterosexuality)" he quotes (I can't remember her name right now,
> > sorry),
> >
> > "Sex is an activity, not an identity."
>
> Recently I read something (I think it had to do with new words being
> added to the Concise OED) that said that using "sex" as a verb is a
> fairly recent phenomenon, maybe since the 1900s if I recall correctly.
>
> >
> > The multiple levels of meaning in this statement help to communicate
> > the many goals that Androgyny can help to accomplish in deconstructing
> > Heterosexist social and cultural ways of thinking (conscious and
> > unconscious) about sex, sexuality, and gender. I am not proposing
> > that DIFFERENCES should be dissolved and no longer used to celebrate
> > one's identity--especially with the need to have labels for groups of
> > people to introduce them into the dominant social-cultural imagination
> > in positive ways, and to pursue political and legal rights (and
> > sometimes just plain existence/life in legal and political language).
> > "Sex is an activity, not an identity" is a powerful virus that knocks
> > people who feel "normal" back a step in their "straight"-forward logic
> > about genetics, biology, and social-cultural environmental influences
> > on the development of identity/personality. It would be interesting
> > to take the quote above and alter it slightly,
> >
> > "[Gender] is an activity, not an identity."
>
> "I'm not a human but I play one on TV."
>
> >
> > This shines a spotlight on the Heterosexist ideology of
> > sex/sexuality/gender/race/class categories used to form identities,
> > and the codes of APPROVED and "NORMAL" behaviours produced by how
> > these categories are defined. One thing many people never question is
> > WHO gets to define these categories and WHO or WHAT (institutions,
> > i.e. schools) has the power and instruments of delivery to
> > indoctrinate people into believing what is "normal" for them.
> > Many people never ask the question what is a "heterosexual," or
> > "man," or "woman," and answer it in very specific ways. They also
> > fail to realize that they deny people an existence and life in how
> > they define the criteria for who is a "man." In a sense, a kind of
> > Cultural Genocide has been committed, and is being committed by
> > Heterosexist media, literature, art, and modes of living;
>
> I think I understand what follows but I hurt my brain trying to read
> it.
>
> > Androgynous
> > beings are denied the basic human rights and priviledges that those
> > that fit into the roles of "men" and "women," and the mandatory
> > uniforms that come with those titles must conform to, are granted must
> > be changed.
>
> > If "Lesbians are not 'women'" (Adrienne Rich, I think, is
> > the source), then Androgynes are not "human beings" (and are denied
> > personhood) due to the socio-cultural genocide that Heterosexist
> > language murders them with on a daily basis.
> > END Part 1
> >
> > Part 2, Definitions and Androgyny
The Helmsman
> Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
Huge snip...
Some thoughts:
Who is your target audience? Yes, I know you want to see who reads this.
Are you trying to get across a theory of your own? Trying to explain
someone else's?
Is this supposed to be an even-handed look? Or the highly slanted rip of
'conventional knowledge' it appears to be?
It's turgid. I'm also reminded of "A word means exactly what I want it to
mean, nothing more, nothing less." Fine, but you'd most likely reach more
people and have them read the whole thing if you get rid of the
emotionally slanted wording and go with words that are in more common
usage. Take the time to read some of the threads on sexuality in this ng
if nothing else. It will at least give you an idea of what terminology
reaches people with an interest in sexuality issues.
If you do insist on using all the words you have... Put a list of
definitions at the beginning of the work.
Check out the ngs that discuss and/or provide support for the
transgendered. Find out what's current knowledge with them. There are
several known transgendered folk writing and posting here. There have
been threads on the subject in this ng. Don't remember when or the
subject lines.
Don't disparge, or show contempt for those who use 'simple language' to
express their ideas. It takes hard earned *skill* to express complex
ideas in simple terms and if you want to reach the most people, learn how
to write simply--and clearly--without also talking down to people.
So, tell us, you mentioned that this is part of a response to a question
posted elsewhere. Are we your 'test audience' before you post it
somewhere else? If you do post it elsewhere, it would be polite of you to
tell those people that this has been posted, discussed, and probably will
be modified as a result of discussion in ASSD.
Any other reasons you're going to all this effort? You're asking us to
give of ourselves, how about fleshing out who you are? We're all people
here, and I for one wouldn't mind knowing some more of your background.
I'll agree with Denny's "Welcome to the funhouse, AKA 'ASSD', AKA 'La
Taverna'."
Oh, who am I? Just a transgendered-bisexual-physically-male writer who
has posted a few stories with various types of sexuality in them. Done it
longer than some, less than others.
And that reminds me... Once I parsed out all the rhetoric, I didn't see
anything in your post that hasn't been discussed here already. It's also
pretty much considered 'commonly accepted knowledge'--for years. :)
Do I have a web site? I have two of them:
http://storiesonline.net/Stasya_T_Canine
http://www.furnation.com/Nikkolai
Some of my work is also available on storiesonline.net and in the ASSM
archives. Some of it has been reposted on other web sites on
the net. Just do a search for 'Stasya T. Canine'.
BronwenSM
wrote:
>I was resonding to something written by another person, and I'll have
>to find where it was and repost it with my Response. I didn't mean to
>come across with an elitist university ego when I dropped that I just
>graduated; the primary reason for mentioning what kind of discourse I
>was going to use has to do with my everyday experiences with people.
I wouldn't worry about that. Never occured to me that you were
displaying an elitist university ego. Did occur to me that you might
be fresh out of college.
Most of the regulars have at least graduate level education, and
those who haven't clearly should have. Dim or aggressive people don't
last long here.
>Many of them have no clue what I am talking about when I use words
>with more than three syllables, and they struggle to follow what I am
>talking about when I use a Feminist-Gender-Queer Academic Theory
>diction. Even when I use mainstream day-to-day diction in a
>conversation about gender with most people, they seem to be so
>embedded within their Hegemonic heterosexist ideology that they are
>unable to think outside the box.
Pardon me, but posting long essays on the basis that your audience is
not likely to have a clue what you're talking about seems unwise. If
your audience doesn't have a clue they're unlikely to bother reading
it at all. If they do have a clue you're potentially patronising them.
You need to remember that this is Usenet. No one *has* to read
*anything*. Lecturing to people - and I'm afraid that first post was a
bit of a lecture - isn't going to give you the response you want. None
of us signed up for a lecture. This is a place for dialogue.
> I am going to "start over" with how I introduce the questions,
>issues, and ideas I am trying to develope, and be more clear about why
>I am posting stuff. I am hoping for an exchange of ideas, and
>responses to my ideas. I also don't really know who is posting here
>that well, and now that I have a better idea I will be able to adapt
>better what I write and how.
<snip>
Thanks for your courtesy about my initial response. This group is
alt.sex.stories.d. The "d" stands for "discussion". This doesn't mean
we talk about nothing but sex stories. Gender and sexuality issues are
on-topic. But you may find that your ideas are not as surprisng here
as you assume. Explaining them in simple English and with short
paragraphs separated by a line would be good.
BronwenSM
On 10 Nov 2004 11:19:48 -0800, andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30)
wrote:
>Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
>
> Several problems arise in the way this question is posed. The
>assumptions that sex, sexuality, and gender (yes, these three things
>are different) are some of the primary categories used in forming an
>identity continues to promote the mainstream thinking about what is
>normal and 'ab'-normal. When an indidvidual attempts to use the
>vocabulary of Heterosexist Society to form their sex/sexuality/gender
>parts of their identity/self they immediately fall into the minefield
>maze that traps them within the borders of the language of
>Heterosexism.
> By labelling parts of your personality "feminine" (or
>"masculine") you bring the crushing weight of centuries of regional
>cultural and social assumptions into play. Things that are "normal"
>become naturalized to such an extent that very few people realize how
>unconscious they are about what they are saying and the impact it has
>on other people who are different than they are. While not many
>people will ever read anything written by Judith Butler about her
>theory that gender is a performance (yes, I know that this is a very
>limited encapsulation of her theory) but the idea of gender and
>sexuality as PERFORMED acts opens up a freer way of thinking and
>speaking about these things--one can no longer be locked into
>biological essentialims, i.e. "man" and all of the "natural" and
>'essential' traits that people believe MUST be PRESENT for one to be
>called a "man."
> One aspect of the concept of Androgyny that destabilizes the
>beliefs that "man" and "woman" concepts come from biological origins
>is the combination of opposites within one being or organism. One
>The multiple levels of meaning in this statement help to communicate
>the many goals that Androgyny can help to accomplish in deconstructing
>Heterosexist social and cultural ways of thinking (conscious and
>unconscious) about sex, sexuality, and gender. I am not proposing
>that DIFFERENCES should be dissolved and no longer used to celebrate
>one's identity--especially with the need to have labels for groups of
>people to introduce them into the dominant social-cultural imagination
>in positive ways, and to pursue political and legal rights (and
>sometimes just plain existence/life in legal and political language).
>"Sex is an activity, not an identity" is a powerful virus that knocks
>people who feel "normal" back a step in their "straight"-forward logic
>about genetics, biology, and social-cultural environmental influences
>on the development of identity/personality. It would be interesting
>to take the quote above and alter it slightly,
>
> "[Gender] is an activity, not an identity."
>
>This shines a spotlight on the Heterosexist ideology of
>sex/sexuality/gender/race/class categories used to form identities,
>and the codes of APPROVED and "NORMAL" behaviours produced by how
>these categories are defined. One thing many people never question is
>WHO gets to define these categories and WHO or WHAT (institutions,
>i.e. schools) has the power and instruments of delivery to
>indoctrinate people into believing what is "normal" for them.
> Many people never ask the question what is a "heterosexual," or
>"man," or "woman," and answer it in very specific ways. They also
>fail to realize that they deny people an existence and life in how
>they define the criteria for who is a "man." In a sense, a kind of
>Cultural Genocide has been committed, and is being committed by
>Heterosexist media, literature, art, and modes of living; Androgynous
>beings are denied the basic human rights and priviledges that those
>that fit into the roles of "men" and "women," and the mandatory
>uniforms that come with those titles must conform to, are granted must
>be changed. If "Lesbians are not 'women'" (Adrienne Rich, I think, is
>the source), then Androgynes are not "human beings" (and are denied
>personhood) due to the socio-cultural genocide that Heterosexist
>language murders them with on a daily basis.
>END Part 1
>
>Part 2, Definitions and Androgyny
Denny Wheeler
wrote:
>When I have more time to write I will address the troglodyte that has
>no patience or understanding for new and first time people.
I have both. But for someone who posts what evidently is an answer to
a question nobody asked, and does so in such pretentious and pompous
manner, I'll reply in a manner I consider appropriate.
>I posted my stuff in an attempt to connect with people who find sex and gender
>topics that they enjoy talking about in an intelligent manner. I am
>not interested in creating a dialogue with someone who sinks to a
>grade school level of insults and "witty" phrases.
I see. "in an intelligent manner" seems, to you, to mean 'use big
words, for the small ones have little or no value to me.' You might
try reading Churchill. Or, for that matter, Clemens or Mencken.
You'll find that all know well how to communicate, and use no more
polysyllabic jawbreakers than absolutely necessary.
You may or may not have noticed that in a somewhat later post than the
one in which I characterized you as likely either a troll or a
net.kook, I remarked on the character of the posters to, and readers
of, this newsgroup.
<shrug> If you've something worthwhile to contribute, I hope you do
so. If it's pomposity, pretentiousness, and pseudo-intellectual
snobbery that you deal in, you'll find that those here are
well-equipped with skewers.
> Thank you BronwenSM for being perceptive and intelligent and kind
>about my efforts, and for recognizing that I am new here. I will
>write more on Saturday when I have more time.
<baits his breath with jelly worms>
Tesseract
Welcome to the madhouse. Try lightening up a bit and just relax.
Wander around and see what everybody is talking about. You'll find
that most people can be very serious, passionate even, on some topics
and quite flippant and irreverent on others. As you get to know us,
you'll get to love us. At that point you should consider getting
professional help. But, once we know a bit more about you, we'll start
to warm to you, too.
The name of the group is alt.sex.stories.d. The d stands for
discussion. We do alot of that. Sometimes we even discuss sex. I've
even heard stories being discussed here at times. No topic is off
topic, but the regulars can get away with straying further from the
official party line than newcomers. You opening post was on topic but
could you somehow involve George Bush in it?
Back to your orignal post: here is the pbs link for that Nova story:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2813gender.html
It's probably about the same person you were thinking about.
--
Tesseract
cmsix
"androgyne30" <andro...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:79ca50b2.04111...@posting.google.com...
> Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
>
The paragraph is your friend - the shorter the paragraph is - the
friendlier it is. Some of us here were not blessed with your
intelectual training and we would be helped along if we could try to
digest your wisdom in smaller bites and I, for one, would appreciate a
blank line after each one.
cmsix
cmsix
"BronwenSM" <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote in message
news:onibp09q034b75frl...@4ax.com...
> On 12 Nov 2004 15:43:26 -0800, andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30)
> wrote:
>
>>I was resonding to something written by another person, and I'll
>>have
>>to find where it was and repost it with my Response. I didn't mean
>>to
>>come across with an elitist university ego when I dropped that I
>>just
>>graduated; the primary reason for mentioning what kind of discourse
>>I
>>was going to use has to do with my everyday experiences with people.
>
> I wouldn't worry about that. Never occured to me that you were
> displaying an elitist university ego. Did occur to me that you might
> be fresh out of college.
>
> Most of the regulars have at least graduate level education, and
> those who haven't clearly should have. Dim or aggressive people
> don't
> last long here.
Sweetness and light; I'm not trying to contradict you. I just want to
mention that some of us here, or at least one of us here does not have
a graduate level education. One of us here graduated with a 4F (a
Vietnam era medical deferment from the military that meant they'd take
the women and children first). That particular regular here is a
little dim, sometimes aggressive, and dare I admit it, sometimes even
downright rude.
He is also "iron headed" and is usually, but not exclusively, only
sorry about it when he has been rude to a female member here. He would
also like to take this chance to apologize once again to Emily,
tenyari, and Stasya T. Canine. He really should also apologize to
Denny Wheeler, Gary Jordan, and Garys Muses Sockpuppet - but they've
since shown the ability to give as good as they get.
Emily, I'm so sorry that I was such an asshole about your inclusion of
my asstr site in your listing of sites. I know that there is nothing I
can do at this late date to make you think I'm a real human, but I
still regret my actions.
tenyari, I'm sorry for my pig headed attack on your decisions about
your own website. I had no right to even comment and I'm ashamed of my
unkind words.
Stasya T. Canine, my explosion against you about Notpad was
unwarranted and inexcusable and memories of it often serve to remind
me what a fool I can be sometimes.
And I can't forget Searchin2K/Garvin. I'm sorry that I ever read any
of your post or replies and I'm sorrier still that I ever replied to
any of them. I will never be able to understand your point of view;
still I didn't have the right to make all the flippant and unkind
remarks about you and what you had to say. My replies really served no
purpose and would have been better left unsaid, or untyped, as it
were.
There now, I've heard that confession is good for the soul. If I had
one, I'd probably feel better now.
I don't want to forget Hammond Wry in this. I don't think I owe her an
apology, or that I ever did, since I think she is just as big an
asshole as I am.
cmsix
<snip>
parthenogenesis
<bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>Reposting with curlies
>
>On 10 Nov 2004 11:19:48 -0800, andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30)
>wrote:
>
>>Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
>>
>> Several problems arise in the way this question is posed. The
>>assumptions that sex, sexuality, and gender (yes, these three things
>>are different) are some of the primary categories used in forming an
>>identity continues to promote the mainstream thinking about what is
>>normal and 'ab'-normal. When an indidvidual attempts to use the
>>vocabulary of Heterosexist Society to form their sex/sexuality/gender
>>parts of their identity/self they immediately fall into the minefield
>>maze that traps them within the borders of the language of
>>Heterosexism.
Sexual postmodernism? Postmodern sexuality? Deconstructive reductio?
My goodness, what a bunch of words.
parthenogenesis
partheno...@XXXyahoo.com
http://www.asstr.org/~parthenogenesis/
The Helmsman
>
> Stasya T. Canine, my explosion against you about Notpad was unwarranted
> and inexcusable and memories of it often serve to remind me what a fool I
> can be sometimes.
I don't remember the post but the tone is familiar. Your passion for
Notpad is a personal trademark of yours. <g>
shrugs...
I think I made a remark to Denny privately but that was it. If that was
an apology, thank you, but I must point out that I never saw the need for
one.
cmsix, I'd love to live in a world that more fools of your caliber.
Adrian Mailenna
andro...@yahoo.ca says...
> I am not interested in creating a dialogue with someone who sinks to a
> grade school level of insults and "witty" phrases.
and
> I posted my stuff in an attempt to connect with people who find sex and
> gender topics that they enjoy talking about in an intelligent manner.
but also
> When I have more time to write I will address the troglodyte that has
<snip>
and elsewhere,
> Many of them have no clue what I am talking about when I use words
> with more than three syllables
<snip>
and even
> And anyone who links "ethnic" with "evil" in the same sentence
> probably has a picture of Hitler on the wall next to their computer.
Hm. Thought-provoking.
--
-Adrian Mailenna
androgyne30
respond to some of the things you've pointed out . . . yes, the basic
points I was making are really nothing new (and I was aware of that),
but I did not want to drop any hugely radical positions in my first
posting. My interests lie in finding other people like myself who
don't think along mainstream lines about sex, sexuality, gender, and
identity; I would like to develope a network of
contacts/friends/critics (and yes, even 'enemies' who will point out
the blindspots in my theorizing so that I can improve/edit/address
issues I miss) who will give honest feedback (not skewed by university
departmental potlitics) to the ideas and research I post.
In a nutshell, I have been working on formulating a Theory of
Androgyny that would open up new discursive spaces in everyday
language and representations of sex/sexuality/gender. For example,
terms that would be used in phrases like: "I'm Androgynous" (instead
of "I'm Straight" or "I'm a 'man'), "I'm an Androsexual," and
"Androsexuality" as a category of sexuality, etc. Terms that already
exist like "transgender," "transsexual," "metrosexual," and
"intergender" to list a few don't seem to express my own personal
sense of what Androgyny means in the 21st Century, or in many of the
historical periods I have been doing research on (i.e. Greeks and
Romans, Middly Ages, Renaissance, 19th and 20th Centuries; usually in
Europe and England for more contemporary stuff, but also in India,
Canada, and the US; I am trying to get away from some of the
Eurocentric and UScentric tendencies in research sources and writing)
as an alternative for identifying one's sex, sexuality, and gender.
As for myself, I am thirty years old, "white" (I won't even begin
to unpack all of the problems I believe exist in this particular
label), "straight" would be the only term I know of that expresses
that I prefer sexual activity with women, but the kinds of sexual
activity I enjoy go far beyond the bounds of what "straight" is
conventionally defined as, working middle-class, university educated
(yet at the same time a high-school dropout), an academic theorist
first literary-scholar close second, and aspiring author of
Gender/Sex/Sexuality texts and Scif-fi Fantasy novels.
As far as the vocabulary and style of my writing, I agree that I
need to make efforts at using a Simple style of prose writing, but at
the same time I also enjoy using my vocabulary and theory diction . .
. so yes, definitions for terms are definitely in order. What I will
not do (and I don't think your asking me to do this) is simplify my
ideas. As far as using words that are "in more common usage" I am
trying to subvert and change the "common language" that continues
prejudiced ideologies, so sometimes it becomes difficult to do so.
And lastly, I believe what many Feminists believe (not all): that
the 'personal is the political is the personal', and in this context I
take that to mean that its okay to have strong personal opinions, and
that I reserve the right to change them as I learn and experience new
things (one of my professors warned me of the dangers of sounding like
the 'high-priest of postmodernism', and I took that as a compliment
AND a warning/constructive criticism; it is extremely difficult for
anyone raised in a hyper-protestant family environment to ever fully
rid themselves of the evangelizing "trait" that that kind of
upbringing indoctrinates you with--no matter how hard I try it still
appears some days, oh well). I also believe that "even-handedness" or
objectivity is an illusion used to camoflage the biases that exist in
every opinion; I don't pretend to be objective because I don't believe
that it is possible; every person is invested in their opinions
economically, physically, mentally, and in many other ways--opinions
don't exist in vacuums, and have real-life origins and effects.
**What I will take to heart from what you wrote is that I need to
remember that my subject is intimately connected to real people and
that I need to watch how my writing addresses sensitive topics and
peoples' feelings.
I hope that this addresses the points you made, and questions you
had for me. And thanks again for taking the time to read my stuff and
respond.
androgyne30
The Helmsman <nulla...@nullaol.commit> wrote in message news:<d9ednb0Dm-y...@giganews.com>...
androgyne30
Your right, I do need to lighten up a bit (I always do,
unfortunately), but at the same time I should let you know that the
three words people who know me would use to describe me are: intense,
serious, and passionate. Please take a look at the other posting that
I made to Staysa T Cannine, and I hope that it will give some more
info about myself, and what I am doing.
And yes, I will write some stuff about Bush. Thanks for giving me
some pointers about etiquette for this Group, I really appreciate it.
And I hope you'll look at my next posting that explains more of my
Theory of Androgny.
androgyne30
HyperTe...@hotmail.com (Tesseract) wrote in message news:<e59c15bf.0411...@posting.google.com>...
androgyne30
Thank you. I'm going to paste in a copy of what I've been
writing to other people today so that you might get a sense of who I
am and what I'm doing posting things on sex.stories.d,
alt.support.intergendered, and soc.support.transgendered. I think
some of the stuff is pretty interesting that other people have been
asking, commenting on, and pointing out about what I am writing and
doing.
I am still trying to figure things out, as far as where I am
posting what, but I don't think that the two postings below are up for
this group. I do think that the subject matter is interesting enough
and falls under the "sex" category that it is appropriate for posting
here, so here goes.
androgyne30
From: andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30)
Newsgroups: alt.support.intergendered
Subject: Re: Part 1 of Response to: Can you be a Hetero-Man or Woman
and Androgynous
References: <79ca50b2.04111...@posting.google.com>
<slrncpcovn.735...@laocoon.triffid.demon.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.103.190.161
Message-ID: <79ca50b2.04111...@posting.google.com>
Hi Jennie
I don't mean to cut and paste the stuff below as an answer to many
of the insightful comments you made to my posting, but I spent a fair
amount of time writing this just before I read your response, and it
addresses many of the things I would write again for you. (This is
posted on sex.stories.d originally.)
I will say a couple of things specifically about Cultural
Genocide though. I do not think we can place concrete boundaries
around this term and bar it from being applied to gender issues. I
wrote a research paper about cultural genocide in 1605 to 1700 in
North America, and many of the nuances of the deliberate and
methodical destruction and re-indoctrination of native peoples does
translate well over into the gender category. If you look at an
Oxford English Dictionary's full entry for "gender" you will see
"species, race, kind" to name a few of the associated terms under the
concept and definition of gender. I wrote another paper in which I
coined the term "gender miscegenation" (miscegenation is basically a
fear of racial intermingling, which I find baffling because I don't
believe that there are any "pure" races to begin with, it is a
category used by imperial and colonial powers to subjugate people).
"gender miscegenation" is a fear of the binary gender system changing
and of people mixing and erasing the artificially contructed gender
norms of behaviours and identities. I think I might post some
excerpts of some of the papers I have written to better explain these
things if I am not being clear here . . . ?
Lastly, the point you make about (in my own words) the focus on
language vs a philosophy or theory of sex/sexuality/gender is very
astute; I agree with you totally that it would be a better approach to
address the ideology and philosophy that underlies the prejudices in
language and ideologies like Heterosexism. I was just reading an
article this afternoon from a "Queer Theory Anthology for Gays,
Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transgender, and Transsexuals" that makes some of
the same points--the author pointed out that Heterosexism perpetuates
binary systems of thinking and language, that MONOSEXISM is the actual
root issue. Monosexism is what the author (I will post the name
later, it escapes me right now) takes from Adrienne Rich's writings
about "Compulsory Heterosexuality" and expands on it and developes it
further in a Bisexual context from a Bisexual perspective. Basically
the attitude that one must choose one sexual orientation and gender
identity or THE other, gay or straight, Lesbian or Straight, with
Bisexuality and other sexualities and genders being erased from
existence within the language.
The article went on to talk about how the Gay and Lesbian
communities (not everyone in them, but enough for it to be a common
experience) tend to do the inverse of Heterosexism--Homosexism (this
is not my term, it is in the article). That Homosexism and
Heterosexism both fall under MONOSEXISM (article) and that they erase
Bisexuality when the insist on the Gay-Straight binary, it leaves no
room for Bi or any other alternatives; Bisexuality ends up being
invisible, and when it is included at all it is as a subcategory of
the Gay or Lesbian category.
Anyway, I am running out of time, and have to go. I will write
more and look for your response later. Thanks for taking the time to
write me.
androgyne30
From: andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30)
Newsgroups: alt.sex.stories.d
Subject: Re: Part 1 of Response to: Can you be a Hetero-Man or Woman
and Androgynous
had for me. And thanks again for taking the time to read my stuff and
respond.
androgyne30
Jennie Kermode <"Jennie Kermode"@triffid.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:<slrncpcovn.735...@laocoon.triffid.demon.co.uk>...
> On 2004-11-10, androgyne30 <andro...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
"cmsix" <cm...@cmsix.com> wrote in message news:<Ditld.26554$bP2....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
androgyne30
I don't know if I can make smaller paragraphs or shorter entries.
I try to be as succinct (fun word to use) as possible, but at the
same time I enjoy writing and talking about things, sorry. I would do
the blank line inbetween each line thing but I don't want what I write
to be expanded on the screen space any more than it already is . . .
I'll have to figure something out . . .
When you say "the paragraph is your friend, the shorter it is . .
. the friendlier it is" I would say, unfortunately that I disagree. I
try to keep the paragraphs I write focussed on one primary idea, but a
lot of the time my paragraphs are "organic" is nature and include many
nuances and research sources that I use in combination with I'm trying
to engage with.
I will try to keep things as brief as possible, and communicate
as clearly as possible--its the only thing I can promise you.
Cheers,
androgyne30
"cmsix" <cm...@cmsix.com> wrote in message news:<klsld.26546$bP2....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>...
cmsix
Apparently you don't understand that indentation renders text quoted
in a usenet reply less legible than if you'd skipped it and used the
common usenet convention of leaving a blank line between paragraphs.
You will never be able to get your thoughts on any significent matter
to fit the space allowed without scrolling, so your concerns about
saving space are in fact making your words less readable for no real
purpose.
If you are doing this in the mistaken notion that you are making the
file size smaller, please remember that a blank line is only on
character.
Also, in this forum at least, top posting is uaually considered
annoying at best.
cmsix
<snip>
The Helmsman
experience.
BTW, even-handedness is not the same as objectivity. It's giving
alternative viewpoints the same respect you expect to get when you present
your own.
I will also note that you have simplified your efforts by focusing on only
human-human relationships and the gender related issues involved with
those. It will be interesting to see if ou stay with this limited view of
sexuality or eventually expand your theory to include things like how
totemism affects a person's understanding of their gender and sexuality,
fex. Furrys, plushiphiles and other forms of sexuality that do not
include humans as the only partners are a few more types of sexuality
intimately involved in how people see themselves and others.
I wish you well on your quest to find kindred spirits and perhaps,
eventually, open more people to the ideas you will be presenting that are
'outside the box' for the 'average' person.
A soft chuckle... "At least, here, you've found people who will be quite
happy to give you honest opinions and also, if you pay attention to some
of them, will help you improve your ability to express yourself and defend
your position."
Tesseract
Postmodern is a concept I don't seem to get. I start with the concept
of modern as current, contemporary, uptodate. Post something generally
means after that something. So postmodern means the future?
--
Tesseract
Denny Wheeler
Just want to reinforce what Chess says here.
>Apparently you don't understand that indentation renders text quoted
>in a usenet reply less legible than if you'd skipped it and used the
>common usenet convention of leaving a blank line between paragraphs.
Additionally, some newsreader software compresses whitespace, thus
removing the indentation; the blank line doesn't disappear.
>You will never be able to get your thoughts on any significent matter
>to fit the space allowed without scrolling, so your concerns about
>saving space are in fact making your words less readable for no real
>purpose.
Quite so. Even a short post will run over one screenful.
>If you are doing this in the mistaken notion that you are making the
>file size smaller, please remember that a blank line is only on
>character.
(editor comment): I believe Chess meant 'only one character' here.
Which is true.
>Also, in this forum at least, top posting is uaually considered
>annoying at best.
It's distracting. Interspersed comments which follow their
antecedents--as herein--are much easier to follow than a clump of
top-posted text which hasn't a direct connection to what engendered
it.
suzee
But when people top post to a 200+ line message, it makes it quicker to
read cause you don't have to scroll all the way through it.
suzee
BronwenSM
<HyperTe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
A definition of postmodern is:
"Of or relating to art, architecture, or literature that reacts
against earlier modernist principles, as by reintroducing traditional
or classical elements of style or by carrying modernist styles or
practices to extremes: “It [a roadhouse]is so architecturally
interesting... with its postmodern wooden booths and sculptural clock”
(Ruth Reichl)."
Modernist (against which postmodern is said to be reacting) is defined
by the same dictionary as:
" 1. a. Modern thought, character, or practice.
b. Sympathy with or conformity to modern ideas, practices, or
standards.
2. A peculiarity of usage or style, as of a word or phrase, that is
characteristic of modern times.
3. often Modernism The deliberate departure from tradition and the use
of innovative forms of expression that distinguish many styles in the
arts and literature of the 20th century.
4. often Modernism A Roman Catholic movement, officially condemned in
1907, that attempted to examine traditional belief according to
contemporary philosophy, criticism, and historiography.
So modernism is "the deliberate departure from tradition and the use
of innovative forms of expression"
And post-modern reacts against that, by "reintroducing traditional or
classical elements of style"
Doesn't get me much further forward, really. Just sounds like the old
in-fashion, out-of-fashion, oh, let's revive the last fashion thing.
Get it all the time in womens fashion. I only wish I'd kept my 80s
clothes. All the rage again ....
The whole thing seems a bit unsteady. I mean, as an idea - or set of
ideas - I wouldn't put my weight on it. Prubly a useful shorthand for
some people, but it's not the sort of idea that seems to actually
*clarify* anything.
Thank you for making me look into it. I am now none the wiser, though
I am better informed.
Bronwen
Tesseract
I understand and agree with the definition of modern As far a
postmodern goes,
if I understand this correctly, thought the word parts mean after
modern, the word means before modern -- "forward to the past".
The Parthenon was modern when originally built by the Greeks. The arch,
and with it the dome, was invented by the Romans. But, when the Romans
used Greek columns with their arches, that would be postmodern?
So, where does that leave neoclassical?
Maybe, if we do this right, we can make that word go away.
--
Tesseract
Altan
> Postmodern is a concept I don't seem to get. I start with the concept
> of modern as current, contemporary, uptodate. Post something generally
> means after that something. So postmodern means the future?
Once people start applying labels like "modern" to static things
(like the art of the decade XYZ), the word looses its meaning and
becomes a label only.
It is entirely possible for postmodern to come before modern and
after futuristic, if you leave assigning labels to artists rather
than mathematicians :-)
A.
------------------------------
http://www.asstr.org/~altan/
------------------------------
BronwenSM
Chess, when I wrote that "Most of the regulars have at least graduate
level education, and those who haven't clearly should have" my meaning
was that some of us have the actual exam passes and some of us don't -
but we've all appear to have the requisite intellect. Nothing you have
posted causes me to think you an exception.
<snip>
The list of apologies that follows is so humble as to surely disarm
those offended. Your final shaft:~
>I don't want to forget Hammond Wry in this. I don't think I owe her an
>apology, or that I ever did, since I think she is just as big an
>asshole as I am.
Is funny but mystifying. Who is Hammond Wry?
androgyne30
I will try to put spaces inbetween things I write on this particular board
from now on. One thing I don't really understand is how any in-depth
discussions take place on topics when one prefers small paragraphs and short
entries. And, again, I realize that I am still learning the ropes, so I will
plead ingnorance for a little while longer. If the writing/discussions took
place in real-time, I could see things working in short answers, but I tend
towards wanting to talk about things in detail, so that I fully understand
what the other person is trying to tell me.
Anyway, thanks for the tips.
androgyne30
Denny Wheeler <den...@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net.INVALID> wrote in message news:<g4dep0lsda8uaf97n...@4ax.com>...
androgyne30
I am quicky realizing that my own day-to-day vocab does not do very well for me
on this board. I am going to post a list of some terms and concepts that I
do think people would find interesting, and that might generate more discussion
in the context of sex, sexuality, and gender. Postmodernism is something that
people are still arguing about what it means, but I will put up the two main
def's in the next couple of days for anyone that wants to know.
As for big words: parthenogenesis? I am going to have to type that into my
Oxford Dictionary on cd-rom. I think I can guess, but I want to make sure. It
is kind of ironic though that someone using a name as big as that finds my use
of large words to be unusual,no? I will continue, though, to take the
suggestions and advice to heart as long as they make sense--which they do. I
would beg the question, though, that isn't it possible that "thats the way we do
things around here" can sometimes be a way of cutting ourselves off from new
experiences?
androgyne30
parthenogenesis <partheno...@XXXyahoo.com> wrote in message news:<k9rcp0hhnga2dbnmv...@4ax.com>...
Adrian Mailenna
> cmsix wrote:
> >
> >
> > Also, in this forum at least, top posting is uaually considered
> > annoying at best.
> >
> > cmsix
> >
> > <snip>
>
> But when people top post to a 200+ line message, it makes it quicker to
> read cause you don't have to scroll all the way through it.
>
> suzee
>
--
-Adrian Mailenna
Spawn of Adam, Heir to God
Denny Wheeler
wrote:
>As for big words: parthenogenesis? I am going to have to type that into my
>Oxford Dictionary on cd-rom. I think I can guess, but I want to make sure. It
>is kind of ironic though that someone using a name as big as that finds my use
>of large words to be unusual,no?
Well, he didn't say 'big words' or 'large words'--he said 'what a
bunch of words'.
And quite a bit of what you're using is meaningless jargon. May go
well in academe[1], but outside that environment, and especially in a
group like this, where using words to stimulate and arouse is a
stock-in-trade, folks prefer that a spade be called a spade.
[1] One of the black marks against today's academic environment, that.
The deterioration we see in English usage, especially in the US, isn't
solely the fault of academic jargon, but such is a large contributor
to the acceptance and use of murky language.
Denny Wheeler
<A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com> wrote:
>In article <41976178...@imbris.com>, suz...@imbris.com says...
>> cmsix wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Also, in this forum at least, top posting is uaually considered
>> > annoying at best.
>> >
>> > cmsix
>> >
>> > <snip>
>>
>> But when people top post to a 200+ line message, it makes it quicker to
>> read cause you don't have to scroll all the way through it.
>>
>> suzee
>>
>That's why God invented snips. >.<
Suzee was maybe thinking of the McCoy, whose snips seem dull.
Denny Wheeler
<bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>>I don't want to forget Hammond Wry in this. I don't think I owe her an
>>apology, or that I ever did, since I think she is just as big an
>>asshole as I am.
>
>Is funny but mystifying. Who is Hammond Wry?
Well, first it's a typo by Chess: s/b 'Hammon Wry'--she posted in here
for a bit, awhile ago, and was doing a writing exercise posting a
series of word-use sketches to ASSM for a couple months
<goes to ASSM records> in spring 2003. Use the ASSM search engine
or just this:
http://assm1.asstr.org/cgi-bin/field_search.cgi?search=hammon+wry&index=subject&submit=Search
I rather liked some of the 'Word of the Day' things she wrote.
Denny Wheeler
wrote:
>Hi Denny and cmsix,
>
> I will try to put spaces inbetween things I write on this particular board
>from now on. One thing I don't really understand is how any in-depth
>discussions take place on topics when one prefers small paragraphs and short
>entries. And, again, I realize that I am still learning the ropes, so I will
>plead ingnorance for a little while longer. If the writing/discussions took
>place in real-time, I could see things working in short answers, but I tend
>towards wanting to talk about things in detail, so that I fully understand
>what the other person is trying to tell me.
>
>Anyway, thanks for the tips.
You're welcome. But 'spaces between paragraphs' not 'between
lines'!!! Please.
The Helmsman
> And quite a bit of what you're using is meaningless jargon. May go well
> in academe[1], but outside that environment, and especially in a group
> like this, where using words to stimulate and arouse is a
> stock-in-trade, folks prefer that a spade be called a spade.
Manipulators, we are. Some of us masters at it, others who grew up during
the propaganda efforts during the cold war, etc. The writers
here are manipulators of emotions and thoughts, writing at various skill
levels. Some of the people here are quite deserving of the accolade:
"Master Wordsmith."
The readers and others here are willing participants in this mutual game
we play. They, too, have come to expect a certain level of competence
before they let themselves be manipulated.
I think all of us are willing to let ourselves be manipulated, if the
person doing it shows some skill at what they are doing.
Potential, you have, if that praise coming from a 'moderately successful
unpaid porn writer' has any meaning to you.
One thing you need to internalize if you plan on being a successful
manipulator of social attitudes. As the newcomer to a group of people,
any group, the responsibility of being able to clealy communicate your
thoughts is yours. The group, and the people in that group, especially on
usenet...
Owe you nothing. Not even the courtesy of listening to you, or in this
case, reading your posts.
Belive it or not, self-expression is encouraged here. But, like any
culture, there are standards that have evolved to facilitate effective
communication. Learn those standards, accept that if you want to reach
this group you will have to prove you are able to work within those 'rules
of conduct' Then, when you do deliberately and knowingly ignore those
standards, people will more readily accept what you have to say. You will
get a fair hearing, at least. The real world isn't that different than
school in that regard. Pay the dues, then, once you've earned the
respect, you get the recognition and respect that is earned, not given
because it has been demanded.
--
"Is a Spade still a Spade if he's been spayed with a spade because he
palmed a spade?"
cmsix
"Denny Wheeler" <den...@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net.INVALID> wrote in message
I din't say she was without value or talent.
cmsix
cmsix
I'm sorry darling, but I'll never bark up that tree again. Oh well,
maybe I'll email you about it someday if you are really very curious,
and you promise to spank me later.
Chessley
cmsix
"Tesseract" <HyperTe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1100444813.5...@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
"Make the word go away, and get it off my shoulders." isn't that from
a song?
Chess
--
Tesseract
cmsix
Does that mean that a thong could be a postmodern G-string?
Chess
cmsix
"suzee" <suz...@imbris.com> wrote in message
news:41976178...@imbris.com...
Darling, we'll get to <snipping> next. Just imagine how happy that
will make Bradley Stoke.
Chess
>
cmsix
>
> I will try to put spaces inbetween things I write on this
> particular board
>
> from now on. One thing I don't really understand is how any
> in-depth
>
> discussions take place on topics when one prefers small paragraphs
> and short
>
> entries.
It is usually accomplished with a determined effort to make your point
succinctly. Writing "Flash Fiction" with a 300 word limit is an
excellent way to practice.
cmsix
suzee
I understand <snip> and use it quite a lot of the time. Just commenting
on ease of reading topposting sometimes, when you've been able to follow
what's been written that it's in reply to. (ok, I'm tired, so that was a
convoluted sentence.) It does help however, when the top poster replies
to the subject, rather than just `me too'. I just skip over those...
suzee
Naive
> cmsix wrote:
<snip>
>> >
>> > But when people top post to a 200+ line message, it makes it quicker
>> > to
>> > read cause you don't have to scroll all the way through it.
>> >
>> > suzee
>>
>> Darling, we'll get to <snipping> next. Just imagine how happy that
>> will make Bradley Stoke.
>
> I understand <snip> and use it quite a lot of the time. Just commenting
> on ease of reading topposting sometimes, when you've been able to follow
> what's been written that it's in reply to. (ok, I'm tired, so that was a
> convoluted sentence.) It does help however, when the top poster replies
> to the subject, rather than just `me too'. I just skip over those...
>
> suzee
You should check your newsreader for a mute function. It mutes all quoted
text so you can just see the post, but if you want you can unmute it and
read the whole thing. On mine it's just a quick-button 'Q'. Not sure how
common this is but its standard on the Pan Newsreader.
Naive
Frank McCoy
<den...@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net.INVALID> wrote:
>Suzee was maybe thinking of the McCoy, whose snips seem dull.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
--
_____
/ ' / ™
,-/-, __ __. ____ /_
(_/ / (_(_/|_/ / <_/ <_
Adrian Mailenna
den...@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net.INVALID says...
> And quite a bit of what you're using is meaningless jargon. May go
> well in academe[1], but outside that environment, and especially in a
> group like this, where using words to stimulate and arouse is a
> stock-in-trade, folks prefer that a spade be called a spade.
>
> [1] One of the black marks against today's academic environment, that.
> The deterioration we see in English usage, especially in the US, isn't
> solely the fault of academic jargon, but such is a large contributor
> to the acceptance and use of murky language.
>
I've been meaning to post at Androgyne and his pretensions of
learning for a couple days now, but right now I've got my dander up and
you're giving me a convenient in, so here goes.
He's not even doing really strong academic writing, to be perfectly
honest. What he's doing, really, is a good impression of someone who
thinks that he can turn a fifth-rate education into a first-rate one by
overdosing on the old thesaurus.
"Postmodernism is something that people are still arguing about what
it means..." - What is this? Horseshit. "Postmodernism's definition is
still under debate." Better. "People still debate the definition of
postmodernism." Better still, because now we have a concrete source of
the debate, without all of the gobbledygook.
Good academics write very clean, understandable papers, not ones
that've been bludgeoned to death by jargon. I've had the pleasure of
reading doctoral thesis from departments ranging from computer science
to sociology here at Cal, and not one of them has tried to pull the kind
of ego-stroking that Androgyne does here. In fact, the times I /have/
seen it invariably come from freshmen and new transfers who haven't yet
mastered either the material or strong, authorial voices. So they try to
fake it. In an ideal academic setting, they get nurtured or beaten into
line pretty quickly; in practice, particularly in America, where higher
education is highly democratic and there are, sadly, not enough carrots
or sticks to go around. People can and do bluff their way through
university educations. It's rarer, I find, at higher-calibre schools,
but it still happens.
So far I've found two basic guidelines:
1 - With knowledge comes confidence. People who genuinely understand
their subject material feel comfortable with it; rarely do they feel the
need to hide it behind Brobdingnagian expressions when simple English
will do. I just finished editing a paper on ultra-thin FinFET
transistors. I can't follow two lines of the math in it, and I barely
understand what a FinFET transistor is, but I can follow the arguments
and reasoning perfectly. Why? It uses good, clean, sharp English,
without any more jargon than is absolutely needed. It's easy to follow
what the jargon means, at least generally, even, just from the flow and
context of the sentencees.
2 - But, in the same vein, with education comes humility. The more you
learn, the more you realize there is yet to know. I've never seen an
academic write down to his audience so much, either; does Androgyne
really think we don't understand binary oppositions? Does he think that
we're too dim to use simple dictionaries, or even the quickie-
definitions that Google offers? Are we so stupid in his eyes that he
thinks he can impress us with material found in almost any freshman
gender-studies class outside Bob Jones University?
Bah.
parthenogenesis
you've written. If you're going to write a treatise, perhaps it would
be good to start with an abstract so that the audience can decide
whether the subject's of interest to them and they want to duke it out
with the whole thing.
Personally, I'm a pragmatic writer. My goal is to get my message
across, whether I'm discussing philosophy, linguistics, or theology;
writing instructions for accomplishing a task with a complicated piece
of software; or crafting an erotic story. If a cloud of words
dissuades my readers from becoming engaged with my writing, then I'm
doing myself--and my readers--a disservice. If I'm trying to impress
someone with my vocabulary, chances are excellent that nobody's going
to be impressed.
Thus, you might want to ask yourself what your goals in writing are.
p~
On 14 Nov 2004 09:45:23 -0800, andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30)
wrote:
>Hi,
partheno...@XXXyahoo.com
http://www.asstr.org/~parthenogenesis/
parthenogenesis
>Postmodern is a concept I don't seem to get. I start with the concept
>of modern as current, contemporary, uptodate. Post something generally
>means after that something. So postmodern means the future?
Academic postmodernism is particular kind of wordy activity that some
people enjoy doing. Personally, I think it's a crock of shit, a bunch
of ersatz academics who don't have a clue and hide behind a barrage of
two-bit words and multiple references to other similar writings.
As far as I'm concerned, the punchline to the whole works is a
brilliant spoof created by New York University professor of physics
Alan Sokol.
Sokol wrote his piece to test his hypothesis that "a leading North
American journal of cultural studies . . . would publish an article
liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it
flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions.'
The hypothesis was not disproved."
You can view--or even read--Sokol's paper and a serious review of it
here:
http://www.sablesys.com/sokal.html
parthenogenesis
partheno...@XXXyahoo.com
http://www.asstr.org/~parthenogenesis/
Hecate
<bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>Doesn't get me much further forward, really. Just sounds like the old
>in-fashion, out-of-fashion, oh, let's revive the last fashion thing.
>Get it all the time in womens fashion. I only wish I'd kept my 80s
>clothes. All the rage again ....
No, you really, really don't. Have you looked at any of those styles
again? I'd rather wear a burqua! ;-)
--
Hecate
hec...@newsguy.com
Darwinian man, though well-behaved,
At best is only,
A monkey, shaved
(G&S)
suzee
It isn't on Navigator. And it's normally not a big deal, just when I'm
short on time.
suzee
parthenogenesis
Here's a "Hear! Hear!" from me.
parthenogenesis
partheno...@XXXyahoo.com
http://www.asstr.org/~parthenogenesis/
cmsix
If I was closer I'd come over and rub your feet.
Chess
Popeski
> Hi Denny and cmsix,
>
> I will try to put spaces inbetween things I write on this particular board
>
> from now on. One thing I don't really understand is how any in-depth
>
> discussions take place on topics when one prefers small paragraphs and short
>
Oh! Oh! Oh! I think I see the problem. You think that in-depth
discussions take place on this board all in one post.
Think of this board as an old fashioned cocktail party. People gather
in groups, wander from group to group, linger when the discussion
going on has some interest for them, maybe contribute to the
discussion, et cetera.
Therefore, many small posts = in-depth discussion, and very few hold
long discourses or they lose their audience.
Popeski
Pompous Know-it-All
Adrian Mailenna
A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com says...
A small correction:
> in practice, particularly in America, where higher education is highly
> democratic and there are, sadly, not enough carrots or sticks to go
> around.
Should read:
in practice, particularly in America, where higher education is highly
democratic, there are, sadly, not enough carrots or sticks to go around.
Mea culpa.
--
-Adrian Mailenna
Yeah, it's trivial. Still, it's good to fix things.
Tesseract
> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:31:47 GMT, "cmsix" <cm...@cmsix.com> wrote:
..
>
> Is funny but mystifying. Who is Hammond Wry?
>
> Bronwen
Just somebody that dropped in while you were out. She was flirting
with me for a while, until she discovered I'm not a real writer.
I thought she was rather nice. And I can't remember what she and cmsix
did to each other, which means it wasn't very important.
--
Tesseract
Tim Merrigan
> parthenogenesis wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:37:06 GMT, BronwenSM
>><bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Reposting with curlies
>>>
>>>On 10 Nov 2004 11:19:48 -0800, andro...@yahoo.ca (androgyne30)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Part 1: Categories, Identity, and Androgyny
>>>>
>>>> Several problems arise in the way this question is posed. The
>>>>assumptions that sex, sexuality, and gender (yes, these three
>
> things
>
>>>>are different) are some of the primary categories used in forming
>
> an
>
>>>>identity continues to promote the mainstream thinking about what is
>>>>normal and 'ab'-normal. When an indidvidual attempts to use the
>>>>vocabulary of Heterosexist Society to form their
>
> sex/sexuality/gender
>
>>>>parts of their identity/self they immediately fall into the
>
> minefield
>
>>>>maze that traps them within the borders of the language of
>>>>Heterosexism.
>>
>>Sexual postmodernism? Postmodern sexuality? Deconstructive
>
> reductio?
>
>>My goodness, what a bunch of words.
>>
>>parthenogenesis
>>
>
>
> of modern as current, contemporary, uptodate. Post something generally
> means after that something. So postmodern means the future?
> Tesseract
In the contexts in which "Postmodern" has meaning "Modern" refers to a
particular fashion, mostly in art and architecture, that got that name
when it was current and up to date (I deliberately don't include
"Contemporary" because that's another similar fashion, such that one of
the current architecture fashions is "Post-contemporary" (a design stile
I think would be better named "Neo Art Deco")).
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America,
and to the republic which it established, one nation, from many peoples,
promising liberty and justice for all.
Feel free to use the above variant pledge in your own postings.
Tim Merrigan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
Tim Merrigan
> On 13 Nov 2004 23:30:51 -0800, "Tesseract"
>
> "Of or relating to art, architecture, or literature that reacts
> against earlier modernist principles, as by reintroducing traditional
> or classical elements of style or by carrying modernist styles or
> practices to extremes: “It [a roadhouse]is so architecturally
> interesting... with its postmodern wooden booths and sculptural clock”
> (Ruth Reichl)."
>
> Modernist (against which postmodern is said to be reacting) is defined
> by the same dictionary as:
>
> " 1. a. Modern thought, character, or practice.
> b. Sympathy with or conformity to modern ideas, practices, or
> standards.
> 2. A peculiarity of usage or style, as of a word or phrase, that is
> characteristic of modern times.
> 3. often Modernism The deliberate departure from tradition and the use
> of innovative forms of expression that distinguish many styles in the
> arts and literature of the 20th century.
> 4. often Modernism A Roman Catholic movement, officially condemned in
> 1907, that attempted to examine traditional belief according to
> contemporary philosophy, criticism, and historiography.
>
> So modernism is "the deliberate departure from tradition and the use
> of innovative forms of expression"
>
> And post-modern reacts against that, by "reintroducing traditional or
> classical elements of style"
>
> in-fashion, out-of-fashion, oh, let's revive the last fashion thing.
> Get it all the time in womens fashion. I only wish I'd kept my 80s
> clothes. All the rage again ....
The cycle takes a bit longer in architecture (a clothing fashion can be
in and out and back in again in the time it takes to go from drawing
board to finished building). Oh, and one form of "Modern" architecture
are all those ugly* glass towers that were built in the '60s.
* I like Art Deco and Post Contemporary, (and don't ask me what
"Contemporary" is.)
> The whole thing seems a bit unsteady. I mean, as an idea - or set of
> ideas - I wouldn't put my weight on it. Prubly a useful shorthand for
> some people, but it's not the sort of idea that seems to actually
> *clarify* anything.
>
> Thank you for making me look into it. I am now none the wiser, though
> I am better informed.
>
> Bronwen
>
> (If replying by email, just remove my panties to get thru!)
Tim Merrigan
>>ideas - I wouldn't put my weight on it. Prubly a useful shorthand for
>>some people, but it's not the sort of idea that seems to actually
>>*clarify* anything.
>>
>>Thank you for making me look into it. I am now none the wiser, though
>>I am better informed.
>>
>>Bronwen
>>
>>(If replying by email, just remove my panties to get thru!)
>
>
> postmodern goes,
> if I understand this correctly, thought the word parts mean after
> modern, the word means before modern -- "forward to the past".
>
> The Parthenon was modern when originally built by the Greeks. The arch,
> and with it the dome, was invented by the Romans. But, when the Romans
> used Greek columns with their arches, that would be postmodern?
>
> So, where does that leave neoclassical?
Neoclassical was an architectural fashion that was popular in the late
18th and early 19th centurys. Most of the public buildings in
Washington, D.C. are Neoclassical.
> Maybe, if we do this right, we can make that word go away.
> --
> Tesseract
BronwenSM
>On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:12:12 GMT, BronwenSM
><bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>
>
>
>>Doesn't get me much further forward, really. Just sounds like the old
>>in-fashion, out-of-fashion, oh, let's revive the last fashion thing.
>>Get it all the time in womens fashion. I only wish I'd kept my 80s
>>clothes. All the rage again ....
>
>No, you really, really don't. Have you looked at any of those styles
>again? I'd rather wear a burqua! ;-)
As I have two obstreperous boys and a from-home job that takes up all
the remaining space, I mostly just shove on whatever comes to hand.
Am looking astonishingly smart today as part of my re-branding
exercise, but usually hit the keyboard wearing something chic - like
an ankle length T-shirt and a big sweater. The only thing I always
remember is scent.
As I will never meet anyone who finds me attractive while I wander
round like a fragrant bag-lady, am currently trying to remember to
make some effort in the mornings.
A burqua would have the same effect as my usual get up - i.e. make me
invisible to the male population. But that's not the effect I'm after.
<g>
I quite liked all that 80s stuff. The nylon leopard skin and the OTT
make-up. The daft lace gloves.
BTW, will answer email properly in a day or two. Life expands. Work is
acting like cavity wall insulation, spreading to take up every
millimetre.
BronwenSM
<A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com> wrote:
>In article <MPG.1c01a7eed...@news.berkeley.edu>,
>A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com says...
>
>A small correction:
>
>> in practice, particularly in America, where higher education is highly
>> democratic and there are, sadly, not enough carrots or sticks to go
>> around.
>
>Should read:
>
>in practice, particularly in America, where higher education is highly
>democratic, there are, sadly, not enough carrots or sticks to go around.
>
>
>Mea culpa.
Don't worry about it. We're not actually marking you. Well, I'm not.
<g>
Beautifully expressed post. Thank you.
cmsix
"Tim Merrigan" <tp...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:41987...@galaxy.uncensored-news.com...
Not to mention infested.
cmsix
cmsix
She accused me of barking up the wrong tree. I had assumed I was just
being my normal polite self, so I apologized and didn't communicate
with her any more.
I got the feeling she was probably just overestimating her
desirability and who was I to burst her bubble.
By the way, I think Father Nat has a picture of her on his images
page.
cmsix
>
> --
> Tesseract
BronwenSM
>
>"BronwenSM" <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote in message
>news:ge3fp051qnfs3j4k6...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:31:47 GMT, "cmsix" <cm...@cmsix.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"BronwenSM" <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote in message
>> <snip>
>>
>> The list of apologies that follows is so humble as to surely disarm
>> those offended. Your final shaft:~
>>
>>>I don't want to forget Hammond Wry in this. I don't think I owe her
>>>an
>>>apology, or that I ever did, since I think she is just as big an
>>>asshole as I am.
>>
>> Is funny but mystifying. Who is Hammond Wry?
>
>I'm sorry darling, but I'll never bark up that tree again. Oh well,
>maybe I'll email you about it someday if you are really very curious,
>and you promise to spank me later.
Cyber spanking isn't noisy enough. <g> But I am curious. Go on, tell
me ... I've looked her up on Google and I can't find a squabble.
BronwenSM
wrote:
>BronwenSM <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote in message news:<ge3fp051qnfs3j4k6...@4ax.com>...
>> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:31:47 GMT, "cmsix" <cm...@cmsix.com> wrote:
>
>..
>
>>
>> Is funny but mystifying. Who is Hammond Wry?
>>
>> Bronwen
>
>Just somebody that dropped in while you were out. She was flirting
>with me for a while, until she discovered I'm not a real writer.
Not a real writer, eh? Heavens, how shocking! <g> Now why would that
matter in terms of flirting?
Only flirt with people you think are going to be valuable/useful...
Might be a good idea. Not one I've tried before. Any carpenters round
here? Electricians? I could be truly saucy for a plasterer (old house,
you know.)
>I thought she was rather nice. And I can't remember what she and cmsix
>did to each other, which means it wasn't very important.
Still wanna know. <pout>
Denny Wheeler
wrote:
>In alt.sex.stories.d Denny Wheeler
><den...@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net.INVALID> wrote:
>
>>Suzee was maybe thinking of the McCoy, whose snips seem dull.
>
>Hey! I resemble that remark!
<g>
-denny-
--
Yes, I have time for the dumb shit.
Frank McCoy
Adrian Mailenna
bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com says...
it.
I have enough of a history as a Grammar Nazi (a girl I tutored once even
made an armband for me at one point) that it seemed necessary.
Oh, well.
--
-Adrian Mailenna
androgyne30
I am not trying to impress anyone with my vocabulary, its my
personal style and I enjoy using it. I totally agree with your point
that the style and diction must be flexible and in line with the
readership you want to communicate your ideas to--I am still figuring
out, though, who is here, and what they like to read about. Why is it
that people make the knee-jerk assumption that someone who is using
complicated or "big" words is trying to impress everyone? If I
actually felt the need to I could post or email you ten years of
writing that consistently demonstrates that I have a love for language
and enjoy learning a lot--this has nothing to do with a need to
impress people.
I generally talk the same way I write, more specifically, when I
talk about sex, sexuality, and gender I bring into the discussion a
lot of what I have been reading, and the vocabularies from these
genres. Please don't assume that I am trying to impress anyone, I am
actually assuming that you have the same level of intelligence and
grasp of language that I do, and that we are speaking as equals.
Until I have been posting longer here, people won't get that I am
very serious about treating them the way I would like to be treated:
with respect, honesty, and integrity. I am not posting here to pursue
some neo-Freudian wish-fulfillment regarding writing. And I am not
trying to inflate an insecure ego by making others feel inferior.
When somone says something I don't get, I ask them questions, or if
they are using a specialized vocab I ask them to break it down for me
so I can learn more . . . I hope this gives a clearer image of why I
am here.
You are right, though, about posting a more specific and clearly
written "abstract," and I will try to do so in the near future. And
yes, I have been asking myself for the last couple of days if this is
the right message board for me.
androgyne30
parthenogenesis <partheno...@XXXyahoo.com> wrote in message news:<rs1gp012fqdo4khgn...@4ax.com>...
Popeski
> On 15 Nov 2004 00:46:10 -0800, HyperTe...@hotmail.com (Tesseract)
> wrote:
>
> >BronwenSM <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote in message news:<ge3fp051qnfs3j4k6...@4ax.com>...
> >> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:31:47 GMT, "cmsix" <cm...@cmsix.com> wrote:
> >
> >..
> >
> >>
> >> Is funny but mystifying. Who is Hammond Wry?
> >>
> >> Bronwen
> >
> >Just somebody that dropped in while you were out. She was flirting
> >with me for a while, until she discovered I'm not a real writer.
>
> Not a real writer, eh? Heavens, how shocking! <g> Now why would that
> matter in terms of flirting?
>
> Only flirt with people you think are going to be valuable/useful...
> Might be a good idea. Not one I've tried before. Any carpenters round
> here? Electricians? I could be truly saucy for a plasterer (old house,
> you know.)
>
Give me a couple of weeks to learn one of those trades and to figure
out how to get from the west coast of North America to your locale.
<pant, pant>
Popeski
cmsix
And that's another thing that I think I remember. I'm hoping you saw
my other reply that told my side of the main story, which wasn't
really much of a story at all, come to think of it.
I read one of her post to ASSM and made a post here saying how much I
enjoyed it. She was offended that I had equated her to her main
character and gave me another dose of the blues over it.
The next day or so, in here but in a different thread she told someone
else that the chaeracter was based on her.
As I said, I tried not to talk to her anymore after that. I do
remember I asked a question some time later and she gave what I
considered the correct answer. I did reply saying that I thought that
was the correct answer, or something to that effect/affect - I don't
know the difference.
Did you find her on Father Nat's image page?
Chessley
cmsix
Like all my squabble, it was subtle.
Most anytime I mention barking, or barking up a tree or your tree it
is because of that squabble.
Chessley
Chessley
cmsix
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:48:43 +0000, Hecate <hec...@newsguy.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:12:12 GMT, BronwenSM
>><bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Doesn't get me much further forward, really. Just sounds like the
>>>old
>>>in-fashion, out-of-fashion, oh, let's revive the last fashion
>>>thing.
>>>Get it all the time in womens fashion. I only wish I'd kept my 80s
>>>clothes. All the rage again ....
>>
>>No, you really, really don't. Have you looked at any of those
>>styles
>>again? I'd rather wear a burqua! ;-)
>
> As I have two obstreperous boys and a from-home job that takes up
> all
> the remaining space, I mostly just shove on whatever comes to hand.
>
> Am looking astonishingly smart today as part of my re-branding
> exercise, but usually hit the keyboard wearing something chic - like
> an ankle length T-shirt and a big sweater. The only thing I always
> remember is scent.
>
> As I will never meet anyone who finds me attractive while I wander
> round like a fragrant bag-lady,
Silly girl, I am somebody and I find you attractive even though I've
never seen you.
Chess
cmsix
>
> I am not trying to impress anyone with my vocabulary, its my
> personal style and I enjoy using it.
That is an excellent reason to do it.
cmsix
BronwenSM
No. All the piccies have gone. Only Ruthie remains. <sigh>
cmsix
Seems like he has run afoul of the asstr.org "image choke" - maybe he
will let me serve his images. I'm to shy to ask so I'll try to get
Denny to ask him.
Chess
Father Ignatius
> >I thought she was rather nice. And I can't remember what she and
cmsix
> >did to each other, which means it wasn't very important.
>
> Still wanna know. <pout>
An enjoyable, no-shit sortuffa sheila with a robust sensayuma who knows
when to take offence and when to josh back. She is, or was, a
computer-oriented person in the US Navy who knows bullshit when she sees
it, and knows what to do about it, too. She features at
http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Images.html looking suspiciously
like Granma Cobol (if you're r-r-r-really patient)
> Bronwen
>
> (If replying by email, just remove my panties to get thru!)
--
Nat
"Father Ignatius" <Father Ignatius at ANTISPAMananzi dot co dot za>
Stories: http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Stories.html
ASSDers: http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Images.html
The Web's Best Illustrated Adult Fiction is at
http://www.ruthiesclub.com/
"Como ela ou não, a mais melhor coisa para Iraq é neste momento uma
presença continuada dos Estados Unidos."
"Somewhere out there is a country called Themiddleast that should
probably be bombed."
androgyne30
Adrian, you just helped me figure out what this board is all
about. Unless I'm mistaken, I never claimed that I was posting
academic papers, and that I was going to follow the MLA
guidelines--especially when people like you are clamouring for me to
return to using a grade six reading and writing level of language. I
mistakenly assumed that you and some (not all) of the other more vocal
people in here might be open to creating a dialogue.
Your obsessions with my style and form just continue to reinforce
my opinion of you as an ignorant hack. It is far easier to criticize
something you don't understand, isn't it? As for my education, there
are twenty-three professors at my university (ranked in the top three
in the country) that would disagree with you. My third and fourth
year essays ranged between the 84 and 95 mark range . . . so evidently
twenty-three people with Phd's disagree with your assessment of my
writing and my education levels.
You also apparently didn't read very closely when I said I was
making exploratory posts to see what kind of reaction I would get to
the ideas I am doing research on. As far as Postmodernism goes, your
display of ignorance about the current published articles and books
about the topic is funny. The current academic discussions are using
intersections of Feminism, Gender, Queer, Postcolonial and other
theories with Postm, so yes, the field is in flux as to what it
actually is right now.
As for do I think you and others are "dim" and don't use
"dictionaries"--yes, apparently some of you are not using
dictionaries. I can't find the post that I read earlier, but ".B"
criticized me for "multitudinous polysylabic" writing. Whoever .B is,
they mispelled poly-"sylabic" in one spot, and "sylable" in another,
in their post; these two words have two LL's. The fact that this
person then dropped that they marked essays for twenty-five years
makes me laugh. B wished that the old red pen B used to mark papers
with was still around, and that I would get a low mark for my style.
B is definitely what I call a literary technician, and I would like B
to tell me where in the MLA format it specifically says one cannot use
theoretical diction and concepts in writing academic papers, that is a
STYLISTIC preference and really has to do with the Gestapo approach to
write my way or get a "D."
Denny also wrote that my writing has an "extreme pomposity" to
it. Really? Denny since when do you use words that have more than
three syllables? Isn't it hippocritical and just a display of your
own egocentrism that you criticize others for doing what you also do?
I have been reading many of your posts and you rarely demonstrate a
capacity for communicating in anything other than monosyllabic
diatribes about my style--apparently content escapes you.
Adrian, why are you afraid to learn new words, and new concepts?
And did you miss the posting where I specifically said I was not
really posting anything radically new to Gender theory and
discussions, that I just wanted to see who was here first? I should
post one of my papers just to shut you up. If my Feminist Theory
Professor believes the research proposal I'm putting together for
graduate work is original and would be interesting to the committees
that decide who gets scholarship funding on a NATIONAL level, perhaps
you might reconsider your opinion.
It absolutely fascinates me that there has been such an outburst
of criticism about how one writes in here, and almost absolutely no
attention to WHAT is being written. Unlike Bronwen and Father
Ignatius, it seems like most of you are interested in continuing the
status quo here, and not in creating dialogue about interesting
issues.
I leave you with some quotes from Oscar Wilde:
"The only thing that the artist cannot see is the obvious. The only
thing that the public can see is the obvious. The result is the
Criticism of the [writer]"
from, A Few Maxims For The Instruction of The Over-[and Under]Educated
p 1203, The Complete Works of Oscar Wilde
"It is better not to be different from one's fellows. The ugly and
the stupid have the best of it in this world. They can sit at their
ease and gape at the play." The Picture of Dorian Gray, page 7, Bantam
Classic Edition
"Yes, she is a peacock in everything but beauty." Lord Henry, The
Picture of Dorian Gray, page 10
Save your time and energy responding to this, when I wrote this I had
already made the decision that I did not want to spend anymore time in
this group.
androgyne30
Adrian Mailenna <A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1c01a7eed...@news.berkeley.edu>...
> In article <ocjfp0t4h6ev7nu18...@4ax.com>,
> den...@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net.INVALID says...
> > And quite a bit of what you're using is meaningless jargon. May go
> > well in academe[1], but outside that environment, and especially in a
> > group like this, where using words to stimulate and arouse is a
> > stock-in-trade, folks prefer that a spade be called a spade.
> >
> > [1] One of the black marks against today's academic environment, that.
> > The deterioration we see in English usage, especially in the US, isn't
> > sol
ely the fault of academic jargon, but such is a large contributor
> > to the acceptance and use of murky language.
> >
>
> I've been meaning to post at Androgyne and his pretensions of
> learning for a couple days now, but right now I've got my dander up and
> you're giving me a convenient in, so here goes.
>
> He's not even doing really strong academic writing, to be perfectly
> honest. What he's doing, really, is a good impression of someone who
> thinks that he can turn a fifth-rate education into a first-rate one by
> overdosing on the old thesaurus.
>
> "Postmodernism is something that people are still arguing about what
> it means..." - What is this? Horseshit. "Postmodernism's definition is
> still under debate." Better. "People still debate the definition of
> postmodernism." Better still, because now we have a concrete source of
> the debate, without all of the gobbledygook.
>
> Good academics write very clean, understandable papers, not ones
> that've been bludgeoned to death by jargon. I've had the pleasure of
> reading doctoral thesis from departments ranging from computer science
> to sociology here at Cal, and not one of them has tried to pull the kind
> of ego-stroking that Androgyne does here. In fact, the times I /have/
> seen it invariably come from freshmen and new transfers who haven't yet
> mastered either the material or strong, authorial voices. So they try to
> fake it. In an ideal academic setting, they get nurtured or beaten into
> line pretty quickly; in practice, particularly in America, where higher
> education is highly democratic and there are, sadly, not enough carrots
> or sticks to go around. People can and do bluff their way through
> university educations. It's rarer, I find, at higher-calibre schools,
> but it still happens.
>
> So far I've found two basic guidelines:
>
> 1 - With knowledge comes confidence. People who genuinely understand
> their subject material feel comfortable with it; rarely do they feel the
> need to hide it behind Brobdingnagian expressions when simple English
> will do. I just finished editing a paper on ultra-thin FinFET
> transistors. I can't follow two lines of the math in it, and I barely
> understand what a FinFET transistor is, but I can follow the arguments
> and reasoning perfectly. Why? It uses good, clean, sharp English,
> without any more jargon than is absolutely needed. It's easy to follow
> what the jargon means, at least generally, even, just from the flow and
> context of the sentencees.
>
> 2 - But, in the same vein, with education comes humility. The more you
> learn, the more you realize there is yet to know. I've never seen an
> academic write down to his audience so much, either; does Androgyne
> really think we don't understand binary oppositions? Does he think that
> we're too dim to use simple dictionaries, or even the quickie-
> definitions that Google offers? Are we so stupid in his eyes that he
> thinks he can impress us with material found in almost any freshman
> gender-studies class outside Bob Jones University?
>
> Bah.
Denny Wheeler
<A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com> wrote:
>In article <342hp0tvlueel0k83...@4ax.com>,
>bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com says...
>> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:53:07 -0800, Adrian Mailenna
>> <A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Mea culpa.
>>
>> Don't worry about it. We're not actually marking you. Well, I'm not.
>> <g>
>>
>> Beautifully expressed post. Thank you.
>>
>*bows* Thank /you/. And thanks to Denny for finally getting me to write
>it.
You're welcome. I enjoyed it. Pomposity should be deflated whenever
encountered. :)
>I have enough of a history as a Grammar Nazi (a girl I tutored once even
>made an armband for me at one point) that it seemed necessary.
<aside> I think Adrian and I would get on famously. </aside>
BronwenSM
<FatherI...@ANTISPAMananzi.co.za> wrote:
>"BronwenSM" <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote in message
>news:bc6hp0d5tgq9e6sje...@4ax.com...
>
>> >I thought she was rather nice. And I can't remember what she and
>cmsix
>> >did to each other, which means it wasn't very important.
>>
>> Still wanna know. <pout>
>
>An enjoyable, no-shit sortuffa sheila with a robust sensayuma who knows
>when to take offence and when to josh back. She is, or was, a
>computer-oriented person in the US Navy who knows bullshit when she sees
>it, and knows what to do about it, too. She features at
>http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Images.html looking suspiciously
>like Granma Cobol (if you're r-r-r-really patient)
And *I* look like TBW!!! Noooooo!! <howling>
Still waiting for the pix to download. Think I'll go for a walk.
Father Ignatius
> On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:53:07 -0800, Adrian Mailenna
> <A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <MPG.1c01a7eed...@news.berkeley.edu>,
> >A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com says...
> >
> >A small correction:
> >
> >> in practice, particularly in America, where higher education is
highly
> >> democratic and there are, sadly, not enough carrots or sticks to go
> >> around.
> >
> >Should read:
> >
> >in practice, particularly in America, where higher education is
highly
> >democratic, there are, sadly, not enough carrots or sticks to go
around.
...in practice, particularly in the USA---where higher education is
highly democratic---there are, sadly, not enough carrots or sticks to go
around.
> >Mea culpa.
>
> Don't worry about it. We're not actually marking you. Well, I'm not.
> <g>
6/10. Could do better. ;-)
BronwenSM
wrote:
<snip>
I know you seem think I'm one of the good guys, but I'm getting
annoyed with you.
Imagine this is virtual bar. You have done the equivalent of walking
into a bar or café you've never used before and launching into a long
dull lecture. A long dull lecture that was both dismally badly written
and patronising.
You did this, incidentally, without bothering to greet anyone or
trying to join existing conversations.
If we were the shits you seem to think we'd have given you hell. Or
ignored you completely. But no. We were very patient. We made an
effort. This is prubly one of the most civilised groups on Usenet.
And now you're slagging everyone off - all the people who told you
gently to LTFU. Who teased you, in a kindly way. Who tried to explain
the conventions ... Where the fuck did you leave your social skills,
Androgyne?
Usenet is dialogue - it's like a conversation. Post 100 lines of
dreary unilluminating jargon and see where it gets you. Stomping off
in a sulk is where it gets you.
Have your hissy fit. Go away and grow up a bit. Eventually you may be
able to converse.
BronwenSM
Father Ignatius
>
> Adrian, you just helped me figure out what this board is all
> about. Unless I'm mistaken, I never claimed that I was posting
[thud] Holy hell. Well fecken done, Adrian! Give that man a banana!
> academic papers, and that I was going to follow the MLA
> guidelines--especially when people like you are clamouring for me to
> return to using a grade six reading and writing level of language. I
Garvin? Is that you?
> mistakenly assumed that you and some (not all) of the other more vocal
> people in here might be open to creating a dialogue.
Now, see, this is your best writing yet here. Stick with it, kid: you
could still do well here.
I'll now stand back from the rush to take it from there.
No, wait...
> the field is in flux as to what it actually is right now.
Oops.
> As for do I think you and others are "dim" and don't use
> "dictionaries"--yes, apparently some of you are not using
> dictionaries. I can't find the post that I read earlier, but ".B"
> criticized me for "multitudinous polysylabic" writing. Whoever .B is,
<sigh> Okay, once again... let's take it from the top: .B was
kid-d-d-ding around.
> they mispelled poly-"sylabic" in one spot, and "sylable" in another,
"they" is plural; .B is singular.
> in their post; these two words have two LL's. The fact that this
Ditto.
And Chicago (a book that is, admittedly, not a dictionary) says that
plurals of qualifications do not take apostrophes so two Licentiates čs
Lettres would be LLs.
> person then dropped that they marked essays for twenty-five years
> makes me laugh. B wished that the old red pen B used to mark papers
This is A Good Thing. A good laugh now and again does one nothing but
good.
> with was still around, and that I would get a low mark for my style.
> B is definitely what I call a literary technician, and I would like B
A good literary technician is rare as rubies and a proud thing to be.
When you are one, then knock it.
> to tell me where in the MLA format it specifically says one cannot use
We don't use MLA. We use Chicago. Deal with it.
> theoretical diction and concepts in writing academic papers, that is a
<cough> "I never claimed that I was posting academic papers" (vide supra
(that's Latin)).
> STYLISTIC preference and really has to do with the Gestapo approach to
> write my way or get a "D."
> Denny also wrote that my writing has an "extreme pomposity" to
> it. Really? Denny since when do you use words that have more than
> three syllables? Isn't it hippocritical and just a display of your
hypocritical
Or is this a sophisticated wordplay? (no, dear, not like "Waiting for
Godot").
> own egocentrism that you criticize others for doing what you also do?
egocentricity
> I have been reading many of your posts and you rarely demonstrate a
> capacity for communicating in anything other than monosyllabic
> diatribes about my style--apparently content escapes you.
Now _that's_ great style. Denny gets a B+, at least (unless he fucks it
up by sliding into, fex, extreme pomposity).
"Anyone who wishes to become a good writer should endeavor, before he
allows himself to be tempted by the more showy qualities, to be direct,
simple, brief, vigorous, and lucid[...]
Prefer the familiar word to the far-fetched.
Prefer the concrete word to the abstract.
Prefer the single word to the circumlocution
Prefer the short word to the long[...]
H.W. Fowler and F.G. Fowler (bless them), "The King's English".
> Adrian, why are you afraid to learn new words, and new concepts?
Yes, Adrian! Why? Why?
> And did you miss the posting where I specifically said I was not
> really posting anything radically new to Gender theory and
> discussions, that I just wanted to see who was here first? I should
> post one of my papers just to shut you up. If my Feminist Theory
[inchoate mouthing]
> Professor believes the research proposal I'm putting together for
> graduate work is original and would be interesting to the committees
> that decide who gets scholarship funding on a NATIONAL level, perhaps
> you might reconsider your opinion.
> It absolutely fascinates me that there has been such an outburst
Relative fascination is so fifteen minutes ago.
> of criticism about how one writes in here, and almost absolutely no
> attention to WHAT is being written. Unlike Bronwen and Father
<patiently> What is written needs to be written well in order to be
read.
> Ignatius, it seems like most of you are interested in continuing the
> status quo here, and not in creating dialogue about interesting
> issues.
You mean "talking about" I'm almost sure. Or, as we would say,
"bullshitting".
> I leave you with some quotes from Oscar Wilde:
"It's a grand life, if you don't weaken"?
"Youth is for storing up cringing embarrassment for age"?
The Helmsman
>
> Usenet is dialogue - it's like a conversation. Post 100 lines of dreary
> unilluminating jargon and see where it gets you. Stomping off in a sulk is
> where it gets you.
>
> Have your hissy fit. Go away and grow up a bit. Eventually you may be able
> to converse.
>
> Bronwen
I think we've been the victims of another student project.
This one was probably something like: "Wrap up a bunch of common knowledge
and outdated info in some emotionally laden jargon that obscures these
facts, then post it to see how many people take it seriously. You might
use something sexual since this can always be controversial, no matter
what group you present it to. Etc..."
'Tis a cryin' shame the person happened to pick a group that recognized he
wasn't saying anything new and/or earthshattering--and said so, very
clearly.
I wonder if that fact will make it into his paper?
Me? I'm wondering if I should have mentioned that I've a bit of
experience at successfully changing people's opinions wrt an unusual
sexual lifestyle.
Nah... He wouldn't be interested, I'm sure. I do it with sixth grade
words--or less.
Never mind.
This is a footnote in the history books... Pretty much signing off from
this thread.
suzee
[snip long rant about critiqueing style both androgyne's and others)
> Isn't it hippocritical and just a display of your
That's hypocritical, and we all make typos from time to time. Now. Just
settle down, and lighten up a touch.
suzee
Adrian Mailenna
andro...@yahoo.ca says...
> Adrian, you just helped me figure out what this board is all
> about.
*chalks one up on the blackboard* I'll bet you're reading this,
despite what you say later on - fragile egos tend to keep up on
themselves that way. Sit down. Have a glass of Scotch or something.
Maybe it'll numb the nerves I seem to hit so easily.
> Unless I'm mistaken, I never claimed that I was posting
> academic papers, and that I was going to follow the MLA
> guidelines--especially when people like you are clamouring for me to
> return to using a grade six reading and writing level of language. I
So what's this, then?
> I like the academic theory style of writing
> because it forces specifity and clarity
(<79ca50b2.04111...@posting.google.com>)
You say you like the academic style of writing; I say you do a damn
poor job of it, and that's the bone I'm picking with you. If you wrote
competently on any level I'd be happy; I read newspapers and
dissertations with roughly equal ease. The problem of the day is that,
for all Word and its Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level will tell you, a
writer's maturity isn't coded in his ability to write spider-killers;
Hemmingway only officially reads at a fourth-grade level.
> Your obsessions with my style and form just continue to reinforce
> my opinion of you as an ignorant hack. It is far easier to criticize
> something you don't understand, isn't it? As for my education, there
> are twenty-three professors at my university (ranked in the top three
> in the country) that would disagree with you. My third and fourth
> year essays ranged between the 84 and 95 mark range . . . so evidently
> twenty-three people with Phd's disagree with your assessment of my
> writing and my education levels.
Translation: *stroke stroke* Oh, yes, Ego, I feel better now! *stroke
stroke* You're so big and strong! *stroke stroke* Ignore what that bad
man said about us! *stroke stroke* Oh, yes!
Trust me, mister, this academic bigger-dick contest leads nowhere
when you're talking to a guy who draws a University paycheck for editing
dissertations. High marks in writing from PhDs, nothing; enough of them
think I'm better at it than they are.
> You also apparently didn't read very closely when I said I was
> making exploratory posts to see what kind of reaction I would get to
> the ideas I am doing research on. As far as Postmodernism goes, your
> display of ignorance about the current published articles and books
> about the topic is funny. The current academic discussions are using
> intersections of Feminism, Gender, Queer, Postcolonial and other
> theories with Postm, so yes, the field is in flux as to what it
> actually is right now.
Translation: They have not yet seen my true brilliance! *pump* Uhh! I
will say he is ignorant, even if he just said exactly what I did, only
articulately! *pump pump* Oh!
I see below you like quotes. That's good; I like quotes, too. Here's
one for you (Ezra Pound, "A Retrospect"):
>>> The scientist does not expect to be acclaimed as a great scientist
>>> until he has discovered something. He begins by learning what has
>>> been discovered already. He goes from that point onward. He does not
>>> bank on being a charming fellow personally. He does not expect his
>>> friends to applaud his results of his freshman class work. Freshmen
>>> in poetry are unfortunately not confined to a definite and
>>> recognisable class room. They are ‘all over the shop’. Is it any
>>> wonder ‘the public is indifferent to poetry?’
In that light I'd probably call you a poet. That's probably the one
time I'll put you anywhere near the label; savor the moment.
> As for do I think you and others are "dim" and don't use
> "dictionaries"--yes, apparently some of you are not using
> dictionaries. I can't find the post that I read earlier, but ".B"
<snip>
> I have been reading many of your posts and you rarely demonstrate a
> capacity for communicating in anything other than monosyllabic
> diatribes about my style--apparently content escapes you.
Translation: What's that, ego? Faster? Faster? *stroke stroke pump pump*
I'm so stylish! *pump*
You mean this? <MPG.1c003e951...@news.berkeley.edu>
You did all the talking for me; I really didn't feel there was
anything more to say.
> Adrian, why are you afraid to learn new words, and new concepts?
Why can't you use them competently?
> And did you miss the posting where I specifically said I was not
> really posting anything radically new to Gender theory and
> discussions, that I just wanted to see who was here first? I should
> post one of my papers just to shut you up. If my Feminist Theory
> Professor believes the research proposal I'm putting together for
> graduate work is original and would be interesting to the committees
> that decide who gets scholarship funding on a NATIONAL level, perhaps
> you might reconsider your opinion.
You should, really. There's nothing I'd like more than for you to
shut me up. I can only judge from what I've seen, and I'd like to think
that higher education still has some backbone, and that an honors-level
English major ought to come out of it with more than introductory
material, with the ability to write with warmth if not with fire, or at
least with the ability to put together a few clean sentences.
On this note, I think I'm good for you. You're actually getting to a
point and carrying it. I'm getting you angry, it seems, and when people
get angry, they drop their pretensions. In furor, veritas, I guess.
> It absolutely fascinates me that there has been such an outburst
> of criticism about how one writes in here, and almost absolutely no
<snip>
> I leave you with some quotes from Oscar Wilde:
Translation: Ohhh, yes, ego! Yes! Yes! Yes! I am so literate!
> Save your time and energy responding to this, when I wrote this I had
> already made the decision that I did not want to spend anymore time in
> this group.
Translation: Maybe I will get the last word in! Oh, yes! Yes! YES!
I win! Thank you, play again. =^.^= Napkins are on the counter if you
need to clean yourself up.
[1] Eggbeater ommelets and synthesized airline food don't count.
--
-Adrian Mailenna
"I'm just having way too much fun here. You sure this is legal?"
Hecate
<bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>Only flirt with people you think are going to be valuable/useful...
>Might be a good idea. Not one I've tried before. Any carpenters round
>here? Electricians? I could be truly saucy for a plasterer (old house,
>you know.)
Oh, I can do electrics...
--
Hecate
hec...@newsguy.com
Darwinian man, though well-behaved,
At best is only,
A monkey, shaved
(G&S)
Hecate
<bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>I quite liked all that 80s stuff. The nylon leopard skin and the OTT
>make-up. The daft lace gloves.
Ra-ra was quite nice. If you had the legs for it ;-) (<aside> I can
still fit into my school uniform skirt <g>).*
>BTW, will answer email properly in a day or two. Life expands. Work is
>acting like cavity wall insulation, spreading to take up every
>millimetre.
>
No worries. I'm not exactly a speedy mail answerer now am I? ;-)
*Mind you, the end result is great as long as you don't gaze above the
waistband ;-)
Hecate
wrote:
>Wow!
>
<snip>
What do you understand by the word "troll"?
Hecate
<A.mai...@ziplip.spamfree.com> wrote:
<snip>
> So far I've found two basic guidelines:
>
>1 - With knowledge comes confidence. People who genuinely understand
>their subject material feel comfortable with it; rarely do they feel the
>need to hide it behind Brobdingnagian expressions when simple English
>will do. I just finished editing a paper on ultra-thin FinFET
>transistors. I can't follow two lines of the math in it, and I barely
>understand what a FinFET transistor is, but I can follow the arguments
>and reasoning perfectly. Why? It uses good, clean, sharp English,
>without any more jargon than is absolutely needed. It's easy to follow
>what the jargon means, at least generally, even, just from the flow and
>context of the sentencees.
>
>2 - But, in the same vein, with education comes humility. The more you
>learn, the more you realize there is yet to know. I've never seen an
>academic write down to his audience so much, either; does Androgyne
>really think we don't understand binary oppositions? Does he think that
>we're too dim to use simple dictionaries, or even the quickie-
>definitions that Google offers? Are we so stupid in his eyes that he
>thinks he can impress us with material found in almost any freshman
>gender-studies class outside Bob Jones University?
>
>Bah.
Excellent. Displays all the cogency of something *not* written by a
post-modernist ;-)
Hecate
<FatherI...@ANTISPAMananzi.co.za> wrote:
>An enjoyable, no-shit sortuffa sheila with a robust sensayuma who knows
>when to take offence and when to josh back. She is, or was, a
>computer-oriented person in the US Navy who knows bullshit when she sees
>it, and knows what to do about it, too. She features at
>http://www.asstr.org/~FatherIgnatius/Images.html looking suspiciously
>like Granma Cobol (if you're r-r-r-really patient)
>
I have to protest - Bronwen is *absolutely not* Margaret bloody
Thatcher!
Hecate
wrote:
> I generally talk the same way I write, more specifically, when I
>talk about sex, sexuality, and gender I bring into the discussion a
>lot of what I have been reading, and the vocabularies from these
>genres. Please don't assume that I am trying to impress anyone, I am
>actually assuming that you have the same level of intelligence and
>grasp of language that I do, and that we are speaking as equals.
No, you're assuming that the use of polysyllables without the use of
logic is a marker of intelligence.
> Until I have been posting longer here, people won't get that I am
>very serious about treating them the way I would like to be treated:
>with respect, honesty, and integrity. I am not posting here to pursue
>some neo-Freudian wish-fulfillment regarding writing. And I am not
>trying to inflate an insecure ego by making others feel inferior.
>When somone says something I don't get, I ask them questions, or if
>they are using a specialized vocab I ask them to break it down for me
>so I can learn more . . . I hope this gives a clearer image of why I
>am here.
If you wish to be treated in the same way you are treating pothers
then you're going to be getting a whole lot of flames real soon now.
DotB
> Wow!
>
> As for do I think you and others are "dim" and don't use
> "dictionaries"--yes, apparently some of you are not using
> dictionaries. I can't find the post that I read earlier, but ".B"
> criticized me for "multitudinous polysylabic" writing. Whoever .B is,
> they mispelled poly-"sylabic" in one spot, and "sylable" in another,
> in their post; these two words have two LL's. The fact that this
> person then dropped that they marked essays for twenty-five years
> makes me laugh. B wished that the old red pen B used to mark papers
> with was still around, and that I would get a low mark for my style.
> B is definitely what I call a literary technician, and I would like B
> to tell me where in the MLA format it specifically says one cannot use
> theoretical diction and concepts in writing academic papers, that is a
> STYLISTIC preference and really has to do with the Gestapo approach to
> write my way or get a "D."
>
ROFLOL - Son, I didn't mean to be part of a posse to chase you off -
but I did find it fun to twist your tail when I could see that you
were "overemphasing" the education that you had. I "copied" your
style. If that bugged you, I made my point. Learn from it and try to
write so that people can read what you say with interest.
BTW, I never said I was a professor at the University - in truth, I
wasn't, but I was a DAMN GOOD engineer and I had an extremely high
rating by my students because I was willing to cut through the BS and
get to the meat of the matter. I would usually hand back one paper
marked well in red ink at the first of the year for many of my
students and they would learn that while technical writing uses words
of many syllables, they should also use as many simple language skills
as possible in their descriptions. It's a skill that many graduates
have thanked me for later because it cuts down on confusion and that
cuts down on "F-ups".
.B
BronwenSM
>On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:01:52 GMT, BronwenSM
><bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>
>
>>Only flirt with people you think are going to be valuable/useful...
>>Might be a good idea. Not one I've tried before. Any carpenters round
>>here? Electricians? I could be truly saucy for a plasterer (old house,
>>you know.)
>
>Oh, I can do electrics...
So perhaps you could light up my life - or at least my kitchen!
Denny Wheeler
>Ra-ra was quite nice. If you had the legs for it ;-) (<aside> I can
>still fit into my school uniform skirt <g>).*
>
>*Mind you, the end result is great as long as you don't gaze above the
>waistband ;-)
And I've seen *your* pic too--and you've a lovely face, silly.
Denny Wheeler
<bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>As I will never meet anyone who finds me attractive while I wander
>round like a fragrant bag-lady, am currently trying to remember to
>make some effort in the mornings.
*Some* of us already find you attractive, regardless of physical
appearance.
(besides, I've seen your pic. )
Denny Wheeler
wrote:
>Wow!
>
> Adrian, you just helped me figure out what this board is all
>about.
Well, you haven't, yet. You prove that below. And in this
sentence--a Usenet newgroup isn't a 'board' of any kind.
>Unless I'm mistaken, I never claimed that I was posting
>academic papers, and that I was going to follow the MLA
>guidelines--especially when people like you are clamouring for me to
>return to using a grade six reading and writing level of language. I
>mistakenly assumed that you and some (not all) of the other more vocal
>people in here might be open to creating a dialogue.
Others have addressed the 'academic papers' question. More on the
'reading and writing level of language issue anon.
> Your obsessions with my style and form just continue to reinforce
>my opinion of you as an ignorant hack. It is far easier to criticize
>something you don't understand, isn't it?
>As for my education, there
>are twenty-three professors at my university (ranked in the top three
>in the country) that would disagree with you. My third and fourth
>year essays ranged between the 84 and 95 mark range . . . so evidently
>twenty-three people with Phd's disagree with your assessment of my
>writing and my education levels.
In what country do they teach that the plural of PhD is PhD's?
Perhaps one with only two universities? Or--from another of your
posts--that 'you are' is shortened to 'your'?
>The current academic discussions are using
>intersections of Feminism, Gender, Queer, Postcolonial and other
>theories with Postm, so yes, the field is in flux as to what it
>actually is right now.
Gobble. Also gabble. 'Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.'
> As for do I think you and others are "dim" and don't use
>"dictionaries"--yes, apparently some of you are not using
>dictionaries.
I know what a dictionary is--what is a "dictionary"? IOW, badly
misused quotation marks.
> I can't find the post that I read earlier, but ".B"
>criticized me for "multitudinous polysylabic" writing. Whoever .B is,
>they mispelled poly-"sylabic" in one spot, and "sylable" in another,
>in their post; these two words have two LL's.
Actually, there's only one double-l in 'syllable' and its derivatives.
Welsh, now--there's a language in which you'll find words with two
LLs. (not LL's)
>The fact that this
>person then dropped that they marked essays for twenty-five years
>makes me laugh. B wished that the old red pen B used to mark papers
>with was still around, and that I would get a low mark for my style.
'The fact that'? Directly from the Department of Redundancy
Department.
(oh boy! My turn for the poorly-wielded peeler.)
> Denny also wrote that my writing has an "extreme pomposity" to
>it. Really? Denny since when do you use words that have more than
>three syllables? Isn't it hippocritical and just a display of your
>own egocentrism that you criticize others for doing what you also do?
Erm. I know when to use short words--and when the longer ones are
needed. Note that the long ones I choose tend to be fairly obvious in
meaning. If and when I require the jawbreakers, they're in context.
Also, I know how to spell 'hypocritical' and use punctuation. In the
above, there should be a comma after my name's second appearance.
>I have been reading many of your posts and you rarely demonstrate a
>capacity for communicating in anything other than monosyllabic
>diatribes about my style--apparently content escapes you.
Your content: (a) has been expounded here before, and much more
clearly, and (b) isn't that interesting to me now. Of course, if you
had something original to say, and the capacity to say it clearly, I'd
be more likely to read it. And thank you--I prefer my diatribes be
monosyllabic.
> Adrian, why are you afraid to learn new words, and new concepts?
>And did you miss the posting where I specifically said I was not
>really posting anything radically new to Gender theory and
>discussions, that I just wanted to see who was here first? I should
>post one of my papers just to shut you up. If my Feminist Theory
>Professor believes the research proposal I'm putting together for
>graduate work is original and would be interesting to the committees
>that decide who gets scholarship funding on a NATIONAL level, perhaps
>you might reconsider your opinion.
Oooohhh. Androgyne knows a Feminist Theory Professor!!! Wowie!!
Hell, I know a French Department Chair (congratulations have been
proffered, along with sympathies). I'm afraid I've never met a
Feminist Theory Professor. Not at all sure I'd want to--nor would I
be overly interested in a school which features one.
> It absolutely fascinates me that there has been such an outburst
>of criticism about how one writes in here, and almost absolutely no
>attention to WHAT is being written.
Why do you find that surprising? What part of 'alt.sex.stories.d'
(for 'discussion') deceives you? "alt"--that's simply one of the
hierarchies of Usenet. "sex"--well, I hope you've a clue there.
"stories"--in conjunction with "sex" it should be clear what kind of
stories we're on about. "d for discussion"--Doesn't that add up to 'a
forum for discussing sex stories'? For writers, readers, editors,
proofers, all of whom are interested in sex stories? OF COURSE we're
interested in how one writes. Sheesh. How many variations are there
on 'boy meets girl, and then they fuck'? (substituting other dramatis
personae as desired) What is to the point is that there are many ways
to tell that story. How does one best use the tools to hand--words,
punctuation--in order to reach the reader's emotions? We here--and I
include myself, though I'm no writer--deal in words, concepts, and
yes, ideas. So of course we're going to pay close attention to how
you--or anyone--writes.
>Save your time and energy responding to this, when I wrote this I had
>already made the decision that I did not want to spend anymore time in
>this group.
>androgyne30
I do hope you're reading this, and the other replies. One day you'll
grasp what we're saying. When you take yourself a bit less seriously,
you might look back.
Oh--in that context, it's 'any more' not 'anymore'; the latter is very
rarely correct, and when it is, it's a regional US dialect.
Father Ignatius
news:5dmjp0lc7n856a3j2...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 10:41:40 GMT, BronwenSM
> <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>
> >As I will never meet anyone who finds me attractive while I wander
> >round like a fragrant bag-lady, am currently trying to remember to
> >make some effort in the mornings.
>
> *Some* of us already find you attractive, regardless of physical
> appearance.
> (besides, I've seen your pic. )
<disingenuously> No, that's Margaret Thatcher.
BronwenSM
He means the real ones. The very old real ones. That wedding one is
definitely 16.5 years old.
cmsix
"Denny Wheeler" <den...@TANSTAAFL.zipcon.net.INVALID> wrote in message
news:5dmjp0lc7n856a3j2...@4ax.com...
> <bron...@mypanties.ntlworld.com > wrote:
>
>>As I will never meet anyone who finds me attractive while I wander
>>round like a fragrant bag-lady, am currently trying to remember to
>>make some effort in the mornings.
>
> *Some* of us already find you attractive, regardless of physical
> appearance.
> (besides, I've seen your pic. )
I hate it when you start bragging.
Chess