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

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump

Too late -- WE SAW your boobs

I think we're mostly familiar with ceremonies where we do anointing. Certainly, if we can imagine a context where humiliation would prove most devastating it'd probably be at a ceremony where someone thought themselves due an honor -- "Carrie," "Good Fellas." "We labored long to adore you, only so to prime your hope, your exposure … and then rather than a ladder up we descended the slops, and hoped, being smitten, you'd judged yourself worthless protoplasm -- a nothing, for letting yourselves hope you might actually be something -- due to be chuted into Hades or Hell." Ostensibly, nothing of the sort occurred during Oscars 2013, where the host, Seth Macfarlane, did a number featuring all the gorgeous Oscar-winning actresses in attendance who sometime in their careers went topless, and pointed this out to them. And it didn't -- not quite. Macarlane would claim that all obscenity would be directed back at him, for being the geek so pathe