Skip to main content

How much do you value your penis, young man? (11 April 2009)

re: EDITED FOR CRUDE LANGUAGE. KEEP IT CIVIL, OR PLEASE COMMENT ON A DIFFERENT SITE WHERE EXPLETIVES ARE WELCOMED. HERE THEY AREN'T. -- TYEE MODERATOR (moderator, “NDP Would add 3 Billion to B.C. Deficit,” Andrew MacLeod, The Tyee, April 10, 2009)

Moderator:

I don't know how many sites there are that actually, as you say, WELCOME expletives--which makes it sound as if their arrival is greeted with warm cheers and eager hopes for more! I know that, for instance, Salon.com (a fairly sophisticated, literate news site) doesn't censor (or too much censor) expletives, and they certainly are used, sometimes in abundance, and the reason may be that they are seen or can be imagined by the eds. as a valid way of most accurately/truthfully expressing oneself. What is civil, respectful, becomes at times at Salon that which is most HONESTLY expressed. Expletives don't necessarily debilitate, and can actually serve to ENCOURAGE good, lively, debate. Their "permission" also suggest a respect for EMOTION as rightful enabler of good thinking -- they can add some of the life that constitutes a lively debate, an idea many traditional, regressive sources would deem worse than a colossal joke.

Now I've seen expletives from posters to Tyee, so I'm guessing that's essentially the case here as well. And despite the requests for cookie recipes, or was it favorite holiday films?, this obviously doesn't seem a “Good Housekeeping” sort of site. But if what you're saying really is please don't go OVERBOARD, because this well can lead to cruel treatment/abuse as well as a marked diminishment in good debate, then I wish you'd said as much. For the way you say it looks to be a practice OF incivility, rudeness -- dehumanization, even, for you seem to be eager-ready, capital letter emblazoned, to banish those who swear to porn sites or equally base/barren but appropriate "homes" for the wicked. But just in case you really mean it when you say you tolerate NO expletives, you must know that this speaks of a near Victorian assessment of what is civil. You may feel strict propriety serves the times and the Tyee well. But you must espy that since the up-and-coming always seems to articulate themselves with unnerving trespass, it's really hard to imagine swimming well upstream amidst all this.

Please take care in how you yourself express yourself. Sometimes when you announce yourself on the site, you are as severe as God, or a thundering, castrating parent (How is what you said not some 50’s patriarchal, "SO LONG AS YOU LIVE IN MY HOUSE, YOU'LL LIVE UNDER MY RULES!," kind of talk?). And we don't want readers either padding themselves on the back for being good boys and girls who practice "right speech," nor tredding with trepidation if they suspect they too might stray off the righteous path. All such lessons the potential in the offerings from Tyee's disparate, worthy contributers.

I say all this because this kind of mod visitation has thundered its way into enough conversations, to draw my concern and alarm.

Link: NDP Would add 3 Billion to B.C. Deficit (The Tyee)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Superimposing another "fourth-wall" Deadpool

I'd like to superimpose the fourth-wall breaking Deadpool that I'd like to have seen in the movie. In my version, he'd break out of the action at some point to discuss with us the following:
1) He'd point out that all the trouble the movie goes to to ensure that the lead actress is never seen completely naked—no nipples shown—in this R-rated movie was done so that later when we suddenly see enough strippers' completely bared breasts that we feel that someone was making up for lost time, we feel that a special, strenuous effort has been made to keep her from a certain fate—one the R-rating would even seemed to have called for, necessitated, even, to properly feed the audience expecting something extra for the movie being more dependent on their ticket purchases. That is, protecting the lead actress was done to legitimize thinking of those left casually unprotected as different kinds of women—not as worthy, not as human.   


2) When Wade/Deadpool and Vanessa are excha…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …

"Life" as political analogy, coming to you via Breitbart News

Immediately after seeing the film, I worked over whether or not the movie works as something the alt-right would produce to alienate us from the left. Mostly the film does work this way  -- as a sort of, de facto, Breitbart production -- I decided, though it's not entirely slam-dunk. There is no disparagement evident for the crew of the space station being a multicultural mix, for instance. Race is not invisible in the film; it feels conspicuous at times, like when the Japanese crew member is shown looking at his black wife on video conference; but the film maker, wherever he was actually raised, seems like someone who was a longtime habitat of a multicultural milieu, some place like London, and likes things that way. But the film cannot convince only as macabre relating to our current fascination with the possibility of life on Mars -- what it no doubt pretends to be doing -- because the idea of “threat” does not permeate this interest at all, whereas it absolutely saturates our …