Advertisement
PREFACE
There are so many beautiful and amazing objects and phenomenon in Existence that it is sad , indeed, that people pass them by and consume so much time with the usual giggles of liberated sex and other earthy phenomenon .
[Even if there were not wasting time on uninhibited sex and other earthy sorts of content ---be it amusement with farting , horror and slasher films , melodrama about office politics and workplace politics and news anecdotes about murder and t.v. shows about it, and so on, would still be pointless .]
The phenomenon of liberated sex is NOT the only cultural malaise , but is part and parcel of larger malaise of the meta-theme of earthiness in general, which the cultural mood of the present era is scalp deep in . One of the main characteristics of the present zeitgeist ( spirit of the age) is earthiness ...a celebration of the crass/ the tacky /the moribund / the sordid .
Yours truly as a participant who often posts on the present message board has noticed that he is often accused of being preoccupied with the sexual proclivities extant in the present era --albeit preoccupied in a derisive way---preoccupied with being *against* such proclivities .However, the truth of the matter is yours truly is chafing at the bit to converse about other topics and highlight not just what one should be against , but instead what people ought to be for and do so not just in a passing way where most of the text is preoccupied with what I am against , but do so more directly . However, the figurative smoke cast by liberated sex (the opiate of the masses) holds such large sway over so much of public and private discourse , that it is time to clear that smoke.
Among other ramifications that the polemics against liberated sex , have , they are a kind of didactic icebreaker .It is important that enough culture jamming of the "memes" of liberated sex be launched and receive enough success at jamming them that a greater plateau in discourse be reached . So enough with the long winded preface and let me cut to the proverbial chase .
TO THE MAIN TOPIC (Please pardon the occasional caps , Brother I-Barb , I will try to keep them at a minimum) .
It has been noticed that when NON-earthy topics (topics *not* having to with sex, nor horror films, nor who one would like to visit revenge upon and so on) have been put in the form of threads that start out as new thread topics in the present forum , such non-earthy topics ---topics having to do with questions of ultimate meaning and meta-meaning---or even photos whose imagery is intricate and beautiful, which could evoke contemplation of such topics, such threads with a few exceptions receive about as much interest as the proverbial Sadie Hawkins at the local sockhop dance !
There have been (in all fairness) some notable exceptions in the present message board . For example , the post by Solari about the near death experience (with its interesting forays into the physics of Black Hole singularities) has attracted more responses. The contributions of Andrew/ Hokey in that thread have been at times a welcome contribution ---when he is not defending sex or to be more accurate opposing the people that are opposed to liberated sex , he does come up with some very fascinating and noteworthy comments in regard to Cabala and physics (though one often wishes one had more ciphers, or a skeleteon key, to help parse the syntax of what he posted) .
The post topic thread regarding what the internet (and the lifeworlds at large might be like) a billion years from now did garner more relevant comments than merely two or three, however , one wishes it could be yet more .
The funny thing is there is often the complaint launched here whose gist is "well, Jason you are the one who keeps posting about sex....you are the one who is always bringing up the topic" (and aside that there is quite a vast difference between mentioning the topic in a way that is *against* it , instead of , in a way that is for sex)
the odd thing is that one would think that people who accuse me of clogging the cyperspace here with some sort of preoccupation *against* (NOT to be confused with a preoccupation for)... sex , if they are indeed interested in other topics and , moreover , other topics of a worthwile sort ---*not* other earthy topics like slasher films , which way one would like to kill ones enemies ect excetera, would then want to post relevant comments on the fledgling posts on deep topics that yours truly and others (like Mr.Solari and I-Barb) , have posted . So it is indeed weird and rather mendacious that we hear the complaint brought by a number of regulars at the present website (though not all make that complaint) that I am supposedly the one who cannot post about anything else ...
For all yours truly has to do is post some post that denounces liberated sex , and one sees how quickly it fills up with people all too glad to tell me what a wacko I am , or that I'm out of touch with the more pressing problems of the Earth, or that I'm a wacko madman "wingnut" *and* out of touch with the more pressing problems of the Earth .
Yet so often when I seek to spark relevant conversation about *other * topics like say astronomy, particular remarkable paintings, the intricate geometry of a type of a beautiful crystal, a quasi-mystical experience had by the poet Elizabeth Bishop (which might have interesting ramifications for epistemology and cognitive theory), beautiful birds and other animals, and so on ...people avoid commenting on it almost like it was a post that could give one leprosy by responding to it !!! But just watch how so many people here are so eager to post comments when defending the sacred cow of sex , from an "infidel" like me dare posting criticism of it .....let me reinterate again for emphasis .
Enrika, a frequent participant here , on another occasion faulted the lack of interest in the thread about the quasi-mystical experience of poet Elizabeth Bishop that I posted , as being possibly due to how I just posted it and did not bother to ask people what they think in order to solicit comments .So in light of that ...yours truly is going to try an interesting experiment . I'm going to post several hyperlinks to online photos (let us hope the hyperlinks take ) and ask people in the present forum to comment upon them .
Let us see if people in the present forum in vast numbers do comment upon them --and with relevant commentary , not using some loose association that people want to make with something sexual ...not a chance for Rockstar to trot out the fixation he has with masturbation that he keeps bringing up time and time again (though Rockstar is certainly welcome and encouraged to comment with relevant commentary) . Will be looking for both quantity and quality of comments in this present thread.
Yours truly hopes to be pleasantly suprised and have the present pessimistic anticipation vanish away like the morning's fog in the noonday sun .
Knowing the tenor of this present earthy , prosaic era and knowing how many (though not all) settle for the well worn fast mediocrity of the earthy, one fears that the earthy , prosaic people will call such content "pretentious" . The term "pretentious" like the mindlessly bandied about term "pseudo-intellectual" (notice those terms are put in sneer quotes to sneer at those who are so quick to use them) tends to be the term used by so many prosaic , contemporary "with it" , today sort of people to christen anything that invites people to do more than wallow their minds in earthy shite and fast giggles . Ask anyone to raise their minds towards anything beyond the tenor of South Park ,Family Guy, Adult Swim , the latest ballyhhooed "thought provoking" smash movie, or some sort of witty , edgy indie film full of double-entendres and irony , then one runs the risk of presenting something of a so-called "pretentious" or so-called "pompous" sort .
So without further ado , let us turn to the hyperlinks . Yours truly can (and probably will add more) in subsequent text posts in the present thread as comments . Yours truly intends to add in another posts some hyperlinks to photos of a beautiful cecropia moth .
Here behind the following hyperlink on can see a photo of a fiddlehead plant :www.digitalnaturalhistory.com/ima....jpg
Provided the hyperlink takes .
One wonders what sort of mathematic proportions the spiral has . Is it a logarithmic spiral or some other sort of spiral ?
delete this comment
Here below is a photo of a mind expanding painting by the French symbolist painter Lucian Levy Dhurmer .
morgansmusings.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/gustofwind-levy-dhurmer.jpg
The symbolists were thought by a number of commentators to be the esthetic precursors to the surrealists (--some of the latter school such as Marc Chagall studied the work of the former ---in the case of Chagall the work of Mikael Vrubel) .
Mr.Rockstar , if you are reading the present text , since you sometimes aspire to be a man of arts and letters , please comment on the photo of the painting 'The Gust of Wind ' .
There are so many beautiful and amazing objects and phenomenon in Existence that it is sad , indeed, that people pass them by and consume so much time with the usual giggles of liberated sex and other earthy phenomenon .
[Even if there were not wasting time on uninhibited sex and other earthy sorts of content ---be it amusement with farting , horror and slasher films , melodrama about office politics and workplace politics and news anecdotes about murder and t.v. shows about it, and so on, would still be pointless .]
The phenomenon of liberated sex is NOT the only cultural malaise , but is part and parcel of larger malaise of the meta-theme of earthiness in general, which the cultural mood of the present era is scalp deep in . One of the main characteristics of the present zeitgeist ( spirit of the age) is earthiness ...a celebration of the crass/ the tacky /the moribund / the sordid .
Yours truly as a participant who often posts on the present message board has noticed that he is often accused of being preoccupied with the sexual proclivities extant in the present era --albeit preoccupied in a derisive way---preoccupied with being *against* such proclivities .However, the truth of the matter is yours truly is chafing at the bit to converse about other topics and highlight not just what one should be against , but instead what people ought to be for and do so not just in a passing way where most of the text is preoccupied with what I am against , but do so more directly . However, the figurative smoke cast by liberated sex (the opiate of the masses) holds such large sway over so much of public and private discourse , that it is time to clear that smoke.
Among other ramifications that the polemics against liberated sex , have , they are a kind of didactic icebreaker .It is important that enough culture jamming of the "memes" of liberated sex be launched and receive enough success at jamming them that a greater plateau in discourse be reached . So enough with the long winded preface and let me cut to the proverbial chase .
TO THE MAIN TOPIC (Please pardon the occasional caps , Brother I-Barb , I will try to keep them at a minimum) .
It has been noticed that when NON-earthy topics (topics *not* having to with sex, nor horror films, nor who one would like to visit revenge upon and so on) have been put in the form of threads that start out as new thread topics in the present forum , such non-earthy topics ---topics having to do with questions of ultimate meaning and meta-meaning---or even photos whose imagery is intricate and beautiful, which could evoke contemplation of such topics, such threads with a few exceptions receive about as much interest as the proverbial Sadie Hawkins at the local sockhop dance !
There have been (in all fairness) some notable exceptions in the present message board . For example , the post by Solari about the near death experience (with its interesting forays into the physics of Black Hole singularities) has attracted more responses. The contributions of Andrew/ Hokey in that thread have been at times a welcome contribution ---when he is not defending sex or to be more accurate opposing the people that are opposed to liberated sex , he does come up with some very fascinating and noteworthy comments in regard to Cabala and physics (though one often wishes one had more ciphers, or a skeleteon key, to help parse the syntax of what he posted) .
The post topic thread regarding what the internet (and the lifeworlds at large might be like) a billion years from now did garner more relevant comments than merely two or three, however , one wishes it could be yet more .
The funny thing is there is often the complaint launched here whose gist is "well, Jason you are the one who keeps posting about sex....you are the one who is always bringing up the topic" (and aside that there is quite a vast difference between mentioning the topic in a way that is *against* it , instead of , in a way that is for sex)
the odd thing is that one would think that people who accuse me of clogging the cyperspace here with some sort of preoccupation *against* (NOT to be confused with a preoccupation for)... sex , if they are indeed interested in other topics and , moreover , other topics of a worthwile sort ---*not* other earthy topics like slasher films , which way one would like to kill ones enemies ect excetera, would then want to post relevant comments on the fledgling posts on deep topics that yours truly and others (like Mr.Solari and I-Barb) , have posted . So it is indeed weird and rather mendacious that we hear the complaint brought by a number of regulars at the present website (though not all make that complaint) that I am supposedly the one who cannot post about anything else ...
For all yours truly has to do is post some post that denounces liberated sex , and one sees how quickly it fills up with people all too glad to tell me what a wacko I am , or that I'm out of touch with the more pressing problems of the Earth, or that I'm a wacko madman "wingnut" *and* out of touch with the more pressing problems of the Earth .
Yet so often when I seek to spark relevant conversation about *other * topics like say astronomy, particular remarkable paintings, the intricate geometry of a type of a beautiful crystal, a quasi-mystical experience had by the poet Elizabeth Bishop (which might have interesting ramifications for epistemology and cognitive theory), beautiful birds and other animals, and so on ...people avoid commenting on it almost like it was a post that could give one leprosy by responding to it !!! But just watch how so many people here are so eager to post comments when defending the sacred cow of sex , from an "infidel" like me dare posting criticism of it .....let me reinterate again for emphasis .
Enrika, a frequent participant here , on another occasion faulted the lack of interest in the thread about the quasi-mystical experience of poet Elizabeth Bishop that I posted , as being possibly due to how I just posted it and did not bother to ask people what they think in order to solicit comments .So in light of that ...yours truly is going to try an interesting experiment . I'm going to post several hyperlinks to online photos (let us hope the hyperlinks take ) and ask people in the present forum to comment upon them .
Let us see if people in the present forum in vast numbers do comment upon them --and with relevant commentary , not using some loose association that people want to make with something sexual ...not a chance for Rockstar to trot out the fixation he has with masturbation that he keeps bringing up time and time again (though Rockstar is certainly welcome and encouraged to comment with relevant commentary) . Will be looking for both quantity and quality of comments in this present thread.
Yours truly hopes to be pleasantly suprised and have the present pessimistic anticipation vanish away like the morning's fog in the noonday sun .
Knowing the tenor of this present earthy , prosaic era and knowing how many (though not all) settle for the well worn fast mediocrity of the earthy, one fears that the earthy , prosaic people will call such content "pretentious" . The term "pretentious" like the mindlessly bandied about term "pseudo-intellectual" (notice those terms are put in sneer quotes to sneer at those who are so quick to use them) tends to be the term used by so many prosaic , contemporary "with it" , today sort of people to christen anything that invites people to do more than wallow their minds in earthy shite and fast giggles . Ask anyone to raise their minds towards anything beyond the tenor of South Park ,Family Guy, Adult Swim , the latest ballyhhooed "thought provoking" smash movie, or some sort of witty , edgy indie film full of double-entendres and irony , then one runs the risk of presenting something of a so-called "pretentious" or so-called "pompous" sort .
So without further ado , let us turn to the hyperlinks . Yours truly can (and probably will add more) in subsequent text posts in the present thread as comments . Yours truly intends to add in another posts some hyperlinks to photos of a beautiful cecropia moth .
Here behind the following hyperlink on can see a photo of a fiddlehead plant :www.digitalnaturalhistory.com/ima....jpg
Provided the hyperlink takes .
One wonders what sort of mathematic proportions the spiral has . Is it a logarithmic spiral or some other sort of spiral ?
delete this comment
Here below is a photo of a mind expanding painting by the French symbolist painter Lucian Levy Dhurmer .
morgansmusings.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/gustofwind-levy-dhurmer.jpg
The symbolists were thought by a number of commentators to be the esthetic precursors to the surrealists (--some of the latter school such as Marc Chagall studied the work of the former ---in the case of Chagall the work of Mikael Vrubel) .
Mr.Rockstar , if you are reading the present text , since you sometimes aspire to be a man of arts and letters , please comment on the photo of the painting 'The Gust of Wind ' .
posted by:
|
Florida
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: AN EXPERIMENT WORTH TRYING
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 11:45 AMThere are 16 mentions of the word "sex" in this post.
-
Re: AN EXPERIMENT WORTH TRYING
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 11:54 AMWhy don't you just assign us comments?
I do wonder though what it is you really want... -
-
Re: AN EXPERIMENT WORTH TRYING
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 12:57 PMDo what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
"I do wonder though what it is you really want..."
he wants to fill the empty hours that he's created for himself, Lori. he's transferred all of his sexual feelings to Loki, and can't express them any other way than by this weird sort of forum-assault thing.
he's sort of like that guy who gets his jollies by sticking big pins into inflatable balls. probably sooner rather than later, pin-in-ball guy and jason Both will snap the rest of the way.
of course, when i -say- jason, i really mean the sock puppet -called- jason that somebody who doesn't actually hold asexual, absolutist beliefs) is controlling. that particular guy really does want sex, it's just that he's so messed up he thinks he can't get any, and at this point in his life it's become a self-fulfilling prophecy. hell, the guy can probably barely talk to women at all in meatspace. i figure he stares at them out of the corner of his eye in grocery stores and the like and then looks away quickly, furiously, wondering if he's been Caught Out.
really, he needs help. won't you go get some help, "jason?" preferrably before you physicalyl harm somebody who isn't you?
Love is the law, love under will. -
-
Re: AN EXPERIMENT WORTH TRYING
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 1:36 PMSolv ,
The vapid typical contemporary statements you are posting is one post that confirms the pessimistic assessment !
So typical the apologetics for earthy mediocrity .
More weird yet typical of the present era psychologizing that comes up with a lot of Inside Edition tabloid style conjecture about me being some sort of deranged person merely becuase I don't support a liberated libido .
Oink out some more cliches ,Solve ..
-
Re: AN EXPERIMENT WORTH TRYING
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 2:39 AMpp: Fri, October 30, 2009 - 12:57 PM
well, at least you figured it
out...
-
-
HI LORI
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 1:38 PMLORI POSTED :I do wonder though what it is you really want...
RESPONSE: Comment with something relevant to say the painting behind the hyperlink photo or the spiral morphology of fiddlehead plants . Soon I'll post some hyperlinks to photos of cecropia moths .... -
-
Re: HI LORI
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 4:53 PMi was ubable to use link to gust of wind, but did image search with artist name and title.
found pics of profile of woman with leaves and areial elements, one was rather pleasant, but another was more intersting and the woman seemed someway distrubed, not mentaly but, somehow mouth agape, in some state of surprise or shock?
wish I could be more sure of just what art pice you were trying to link to, maybe my browser is el crapo.......... -
-
Re: HI LORI
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 4:59 PM -
-
Re: HI LORI
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 5:09 PMThank you earnestly, Enrika .
Yes, Enrika has the right link there .
-
Re: HI LORI
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 4:18 PM<<morgansmusings.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/gustofwind-levy-dhurmer.jpg
It's quite lovely. >>
Yeah, this one is really nice. I like her resolute yet slightly melancholy facial expression, as if she's reflecting on fall and the apparent death of the summer season. Also nice is the unflinching lean into the future she affects, covered in a blood-red hue. -
-
Re: HI LORI
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 5:00 PMThank you earnestly Mushroom . Now that 's postin !
-
-
-
Re: HI LORI
Fri, October 30, 2009 - 5:01 PMnew link did work, the painting you refer to has the crimson color scheme, it is very nice, and very square in composition, usually a square is not to good , but here, not to bad.
I would agree with anyone who sees beuty in the artwork.
A little two dimensional for me though?
I'm all about the big overblown massive painting of the neoclassical period, painters paintings, like Dali's wotk.
I guess craftmenship somehow more intersts me than content?
( the eye of the beholder, something therin lies? ) -
-
Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 1:11 AMHere is a photo of a cecropia moth that can be access by clicking on the following hyperlink :www.redbubble.com/people/ro...t-21998339
At least one hopes it can, provided there is not a malfunction . -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 1:05 PMHere is a hyperlink to another Cecropia Moth :www.redbubble.com/people/ba...ropia-moth
Discuss the moths , people .
Mr.Rockstar , do you acknowledge that the moths seen after clicking on the hyperlinks are beautiful . -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 1:24 PM"Discuss the moths , people ."
Again, not sure what you want us to say. Yes, they're quite lovely. But it's not really a topic, is it? What about the moths? Is there something controversial about them that you'd like to hear different points of view on? -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 1:40 PMpp: But it's not really a topic, is it?
124pm
cryptic.
the code is written in the
colors
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 5:58 PMWhat comes into your mind , Enrika, when you see the moths ?
Mention what comes into your mind . -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 8:01 PMAnything else , Enrika .?
Also you and everyone else is invited to click upon the following hyperlink and provided it takes see an amazing image .
beinart.org/modules/PHP-...ImageView.php
You and all others are invited to comment upon the image .
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 8:31 PM"Anything else , Enrika .?"
"Oooh, pretty. I wonder what the hell Jason is expecting me to say about this." -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 8:35 PMMy roommate says, "I've never seen an insect with such bright red legs before." She also says, "Do you know there's no scientific validity to categorizing moths vs. butterflies?" She also says, "Oooh, pretty."
Is this the sort of thing you were hoping for? -
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sun, November 1, 2009 - 2:28 AMYou might have better luck striking up a conversation about moths in the entomology tribe:
entomologyfreaks.tribe.net/
-
-
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sat, October 31, 2009 - 10:28 PMMolly,
Those moths are beautiful creatures. They are NOT attention whores .
Incidentally, you are one of the people I had in mind, when I mentioned at the beginning essay of a thread how eager people around here are to comment when they're is a post disparaging sex to rush in a defend the sacred cow of sex , but when some more deep and/or ethereal topic is presented in a thread hardly even show a thimblefull of interest .
The one exception that I can recall--was that ---in a ll fairness , you did comment on the Edward Hopper painting , 'Nighthawks' . Would be nice if you would keep returning interests *more often*, however, to other topics instead of sex . -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sun, November 1, 2009 - 12:39 AMI was calling you an attention whore, you dolt. Calling you for what you are has nothing to do with defending sex.
It's not so much that I'm some kind of rabid pro-sex person, I'm just anti-you. You are a useless attention whore. -
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Sun, November 1, 2009 - 1:40 AMor drama queens...
i do believe everybody
here
one or the
other
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 8:10 AMMOLLY POSTED : I was calling you an attention whore, you dolt. Calling you for what you are has nothing to do with defending sex.
RESPONSE: Oh, I see . Well I'm trying to call attention *not* to myself but to moths , nad beautiful plants, and paintings.
So therefore you are still in the wrong , Molly .Very wrong . -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 2:18 PMlook people; vote in a mod and let's delete this person, please? You don't have to "take time" to do it, Pinky - you just click "remove this member" and that's that. You never have to mod again. I swear. Except for when J persistently rejoins the forum. -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 3:22 PMI've been wondering what I Barb's take on Jason was. Is he abdicating as mod? I am pretty tired of this being the Jason Leary tribe, a discussion about someone else's pet theories would be a welcome change.
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 3:32 PM"look people; vote in a mod and let's delete this person, please?"
I think you're confusing this with Heated Debate. This is I-Barb's tribe. (It's easy to confuse the two; they've both turned into Jason Leary wankfests.) -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 4:29 PMlet jason go
don't bother me
but i ain't going..
and please do not bother tou girlies...
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 4:31 PM>>I think you're confusing this with Heated Debate.<<
oops! but still
deleeeeeeete! it's not just for me; it's for the sake of the epistemologically certain and indisputable fact that J Leary is a molester of goats and tapirs. -
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 5:01 PMlokimeinthe i:
easy to forget
hard to fight
you remind me of a cunt called: pickerwick
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 5:03 PMLoki so mcuh of relativist ...so given to thinking outside the box he doesn't know what tribe its in .
Furthermore, i saw a tapir at Cyress Gardens park in Winter Haven , Florida in 2001 and wouldn't ever molest such a beautiful creature .
Do birds fly away from you with a squawk of horror and disdain Lokifreign ?.
Do small children run from you and horses go back into the stable whenever you arrive .?
-
-
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 3:29 PMNo, it's all about what you want to talk about, Jason, and no one else. You take over every damned conversation with your useless pseudo-absolutist crap or random art. I call that being an attention whore. If it were either intellectual or barbaric, this would be the place for it, but even then you would need to allow conversation to be directed by people other than yourself once in a while. Your obsessive need to control other people's responses, beliefs and ideas got stale pretty fast, and I'm done being nice to you. -
-
Molly , How Dare You Disparage The Art !
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 6:50 PMMOLLY POSTED :No, it's all about what you want to talk about, Jason, and no one else.
RESPONSE: That quite frankly, is a petulant , bratty sort of reply, Molly . I'm suprised you left out typing "like whatever" as part of the reply , since that would fit the tenor of the way you have been thinking lately .
MOLLY POSTED :You take over every damned conversation with your useless pseudo-absolutist crap
RESPONSE: Nothing "pseudo" about it . It is untrammelled purist /absolutism all the way ...
MOLLY POSTED :or random art. I call that being an attention whore.
RESPONSE: So now you are disparaging the art as well ? How dare you disparage such beautiful art---especially when you make NO specific, substantial argument against it. The artists went to all the work of making such beautiful works of art , and you dismiss it . That just goes to show . Molly, how coarse and crass the sensibility with which you approach the issues . I don;t care what you state about me as a person , but you dismiss excellent works of art. That's very crass of you young lady . It confirms the thesis that you are aming those who prize the earthy .
MOLLY POSTED :If it were either intellectual or barbaric, this would be the place for it, but even then you would need to allow conversation to be directed by people other than yourself once in a while.
RESPONSE: You and your earthy entourage of Loki supporters are not hindered freom posting threads if you wish . There is NO magic button that I've pressed to prevent you from posting .
MOLLY POSTED :Your obsessive need to control other people's responses, beliefs and ideas got stale pretty fast,
RESPONSE: Denouncing crass and/or ambivalent/ambiguous / murky beliefs as totally wrong and telling people that they should renounce such beliefs is *constructive criticism* !
MOLLY POSTED :and I'm done being nice to you.
RESPONSE: Isn't the truth of the matter that the post which opened this present thread (as well as the excellent article I posted by Editorial columinist named Jennifer King which denounced the sex positive movement ) "struck a nerve" so to speak with Truth that you found to be a nuisance to the sacred cow of liberated sex which you vaunt so much ????
Keep in mind that Editorial Columnist Jennifer King shows wisdom , an attitude of circumspection in thought which you sorely lack . You should follow the counsel of a wise mature person like Ms.King and agree with what she wrote since it shows a mature , insightful approach to the issue it addressed .
Molly repeat the folllowing , 'I , Molly, will heed the counsel expressed in the excellent article by Miss Jennifer King . I Molly do hereby disavow the adolescent attitude that I formerly professed of supporting liberated sex...the vapid and puerile sex positive ideology and from now on will earnestly attempt to cultivate a circumspect attitude , an outlook no longer governed by the adolescent sex positive rubbish I once espoused . I acknowledge that the counsel of Miss King expressed in the editorial article presented a maturity of mind , that I Molly who was under the influence of Lokifreign sorely lacked, and any opposition that I may have presented to it was presented in the careless flower of youth . I Molly , will renounce every last bit of affinity for sexual libertine thinking and activities and also renounce all support for relativism . I am thankful to the excellent and sagacious article of Ms.King and applaud her for straightening me out and for helping to edify me, so lost I was in the heedless flower of my youth '. Repeat that aforementioned statement verbatim when you get the chance , Molly .
Relativism does not have to be a ball and chain around the feet of Molly forever. Step out of the darkness into the light , Molly . There is still time , and still hope .
That you in the posts you made in the present thread did not offer any appreciative commentary to the wonderful artists who made the intricate art, (seen behind the hyperlinks) , nor commented on the intricate forms of the beautiful moths (referenced in the hyperlinks) was very telling of the earthiness and banality that characterizes the mood of much of public discourse in this present mass media influenced decade. It confirms the pessimism .
After all ,
sexy people=prosaic people .
However, it does not have to be a legacy for you forever , Molly . You can step out of the darkness of relativism and earthy banality and into the light . Let's not give up on Molly ... -
-
Something to Marvel At. I did not paint it. The person who did however went to the trouble to paint it , we should marvel at it and contemplate it .
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 7:00 PMHere is a hyperlink to an amazing painting by a painter of recent years, whose use of light and treatment of facial figures is reminsicent of the old masters :beinart.org/modules/PHP-...ImageView.php
There were people commenting on art in this present thread --so this present thread had a good promising start, but then commentary of earnest fascination slacked off .
Please comment some more , or this present thread will serve as a testament to pessimism (the pessimistic prospect that many in the present thread would rather discuss sex and other earthy , *prosaic* topics )
If the thread does not get the number of responses (or more) that a thread on sex , revenge, or some horror movie would get, and there has not been any malfunctions to prevent posts --then the pessimistic thesis will be confirmed !
-
Re: Molly , How Dare You Disparage The Art !
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 7:20 PMYou often rebuke people for "reading your mind", Jason, yet you claim to know my thoughts here. There is nothing petulant or bratty about calling you on your shit. Of course, you did exactly as I predicted. You sidestepped the issue and put your old, stale pseudo-absolutist dogma in it's place. You are the worst attention whore, and you are a badly concealed closet relativist. And again, you are an utterly useless person. You do nothing to improve the world you live in.
I suggest you repeat the following, "I, Jason, am a pompous, self-centered ass who forces his single ill-supported opinion on anything that breathes, whether they want to hear it or not. I, Jason, will stop posting my inane prattle on tribe.net, and will only post if I have something completely new to say. I, Jason, apologize for the rude, thoughtless, and wrong-headed statements I've made against my fellow tribers. I, Jason, am a closeted relativist, among other things. I, Jason, have stalked Loki and others, and I will refrain from this behavior in the future. I promise to get up from my computer and do something like volunteering at a soup kitchen. I, Jason, apologize for my bad behavior and promise not to do it again."
It's very telling that you, Jason, steer every statement made to you into your own pet opinion. It's very telling that you only accept specific types of comments and disdain those that you did not demand. Very telling of your childish desire to control anyone you can. Remember,
Jason= annoying people
Idiocy does not need to be the ball and chain around Jason's feet forever. Step out of the ignorance and into the world around you, the one with people that desperately need your help. Not for your thoughts, but for your deeds. Feed someone, clothe someone, read to someone.
There's still time, Jason. You, too, can contribute to the betterment of the world. Go out and volunteer. -
-
Reforming wayward Molly .
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 8:40 PMMOLLY POSTED :You often rebuke people for "reading your mind", Jason, yet you claim to know my thoughts here.
RESPONSE: The posts you make evidence what sensibility you have . The tawdry statements you make ; the pervasive use of the term 'fuck' and conjugates of it ....
MOLLY POSTED : There is nothing petulant or bratty about calling you on your shit.
RESPONSE: Oh , yes , there certainly is , young lady .
MOLLY POSTED :Of course, you did exactly as I predicted. You sidestepped the issue and put your old, stale pseudo-absolutist dogma in it's place.
RESPONSE: Call it abolutist dogma , NOT "pseudo-absolutist" .
MOLLY POSTED :You are the worst attention whore, and you are a badly concealed closet relativist.
RESPONSE: Again I seek attention for the content , NOTR myself . As for accusing me of being a closet relativist, how many hours or minutes did that unrepentant relativist Lokifreign spend coaching you with rehearsals of that switcharoo ?
MOLLY POSTED : And again, you are an utterly useless person. You do nothing to improve the world you live in.
RESPONSE: The issue is NOT whether I am this or that person .The issue is the content of what I post which is right .
You persist in calling the absolutely true beliefs which I post mere opinions. That is a misnomer, young lady .
Furthermore, you are NOT following directions . You were told the line to repeat . After all , you are obligated to agree with the thesis regarding the evil of the sex positive movement as expressed in the excellent article written by Jennifer King . Whether you want to agree with the thesis presented in the article by Ms. King matters NOT a whit. You are obligated to agree with that thesis since that thesis expresses absolute ethical truth NOT mere opinion . -
-
Re: Reforming wayward Molly .
Mon, November 2, 2009 - 9:26 PMnot bad link
artistry is like writing -
-
Re: Reforming wayward Molly .
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 3:23 AMThank You , Roger.
Glad to know that someone appreciates the art .
Please elaborate on the statement , 'artistry is like writing. ' -
-
Re: Reforming wayward Molly .
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 4:21 AMsome can draw
some can write -
-
Re: Reforming wayward Molly .
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 6:37 AMI see.
It would be good if Molly and ZaeM ( two people who are uncritical supporters of that scurrilous Lokifreign) had the appreciation of deep edifying topics like art --which you have .
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Cecropia Moth
Tue, November 3, 2009 - 4:15 PMbeinart.org/modules/PHP-...ImageView.php
That's just damn spooky. -
-
Let's keep it going folks .
Mon, November 9, 2009 - 9:25 PMLet's keep it going folks . Some good people here did post specific commentary on the beautiful imagery behind the hyperlinks --those will be remembered as having not consented in with the earthy ones--but as having shown more depth.
But when are more people here going to pick up and make commentary on such beautiful things to marvel at ?
If I made a post deriding liberated sex as bad , watch how fast it would fill up with the posts of people like Rockstar, ZaeM ,and Loki posting defenses of sex till the thread swelled into something near the 100 replies amrk if not over . At least going on what has happened in the past here (inductive reasoning) that is the way it tends to go .
Yet when I post on topics truly precious and remarkable like moths with elaborate patterns on their wings, fiddlehead plants , the paintings of French Symbolist painters like Luican Levy-Dhurmer why doesn't it get the level of post replies here from so many persons here as a post dealing with a crass activity like liberated sex . Could it be crassness and mediocrity on behalf of the people who would rather discuss sex .
A similar phenomenon would likely happen if someone were to make a post on some grisly slasher film ---watch a crass earthy topic like that swell up here with lots of comments far more than the present thread you are now looking at .
Show this pessimism misplaced people by posting more relevant commentary in this present thread .
Yours truly will give it 3 more days and then publish the comments on how the present experiment went .
Post something relevant about interesting things like beautiful moths and works of art instead of earthy crass stuff like sex and killer movies !
-
-
Re: Let's keep it going folks .
Mon, November 9, 2009 - 9:28 PMsometimes we all forget what thread we on
and until it is steered back to original
happens all the time
-
Re: Let's keep it going folks .
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 2:49 AMIt's because you are roundly despised, J; usually, the effort to appear interested in some boring crap someone is enthusiastic about is expended *only* on behalf of loved ones and valued colleagues. People that scream "you are filth" and make a habit of long-winded and fruitless diatribes that are dishonest, intellectually retarded, and morally repugnant are not valued nor humored.
Be interesting or entertaining about your subject; don't expect your stunted social awareness, childish fixations, and naive sensibilities to be of great interest to adults. This is shit you can do with 5th graders - but, of course, you may be dimed by a sniper if you walk toward 5th graders. -
-
Loki puts forth trash yet again .
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 8:35 AMLOKI POSTED : It's because you are roundly despised, J; usually, the effort to appear interested in some boring crap someone is enthusiastic about
REDPONSE: Well let's start with the first of the falsehoods you put forth. The claim that exotic plants with an unusual morphology, beautiful insects like moths , and ethereal and intricate works of art by French symbolist painters and other artists , us somehow "boring" is a patently false claim . That you call such fare boring goes to show just how crass and prosaic the sensibility you have is, Lokifreign . You tend to like salacious and sordid topics , so it is hardly any wonder that you call the visually intricate and scientifically interesting topics boring. It is, nonetheless, appalling that you claim that .
LOKI POSTED : is expended *only* on behalf of loved ones and valued colleagues. People that scream "you are filth" and make a habit of long-winded and fruitless diatribes that are dishonest, intellectually retarded, and morally repugnant are not valued nor humored.
RESPONSE: Are you a solemn faced comic , Loki ? The diatribes are long-winded , but to call them dishonest, intellectually retarded, and morally repugnant is ludicrous .
LOKI RESPONSE :Be interesting or entertaining about your subject; don't expect your stunted social awareness, childish fixations, and naive sensibilities to be of great interest to adults.
RESPONSE: Be entertaining ---Loki states . So that is what you want , Lokifreign , entertainment ? well why didn't you just state that without the mystification . Beautiful , intricate items like Cecropia moths, fiddlehead plants, and well wrought paintings you call "childish fixations" . Well if developing a dis-interest in such topics is what you call childish and developing an interest in liberated sex, slasher movies, movies with gratuitous violence and lots of mind numbing , pulse- pumping suspense , are what you call " maturity "--IF that's what maturity is, then what's so great about maturity.?
Jesus said 'unless ye shall become as little children ye shall in no way enter the kingdom ', according to Luke
Perhaps you can regail us with "mature" fare , Loki, which you are wont to chat about in other tribes, such as the TMI message boards-- where you made a point of posting about adult topics: such as how you wanted an artificial hymen implanted on your bottom ....
LOKI POSTED :This is shit you can do with 5th graders
RESPONSE: Well thank God For the 5th graders maybe they with the innocent awe they have at creation they will help rescue this present country (and much of Europe also) from its media- led, extended adolescence
LOKI POSTED :- but, of course, you may be dimed by a sniper if you walk toward 5th graders.
RESPONSE : Hello, you, Loki, are the sexual libertine; I am the prude!. We should be worried about YOU coming into contact 5th Graders . -
-
Re: Loki puts forth trash yet again .
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 9:36 AMDo what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
"Are you a solemn faced comic , Loki ? The diatribes are long-winded , but to call them dishonest, intellectually retarded, and morally repugnant is ludicrous ."
actually, "Jason," from our point of view it is Not ludicrous, except to the extent that You are ludicrous.
" Hello, you, Loki, are the sexual libertine; I am the prude!. We should be worried about YOU coming into contact 5th Graders"
nonsense. people who embrace their sexualities aren't likely to harm children. people who deny their sexualities, especially to the point of denying sex in the first place and (as you do) fixating on qualities that are not present in the sexually mature, Are likely to harm children. if you had come to me to apply as a foster parent here in My town, i'd show you the door quicker than you can say "fits the profile."
Love is the law, love under will. -
-
Loki puts forth trash yet again .And Solve presents false apologetics for it .
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 11:37 AM"Are you a solemn faced comic , Loki ? The diatribes are long-winded , but to call them dishonest, intellectually retarded, and morally repugnant is ludicrous ."
actually, "Jason," from our point of view it is Not ludicrous, except to the extent that You are ludicrous.
" Hello, you, Loki, are the sexual libertine; I am the prude!. We should be worried about YOU coming into contact 5th Graders"
SOLVE POSTED :nonsense. people who embrace their sexualities aren't likely to harm children.
RESPONSE: Who told you that hogwash , young lady ?. (The NAMBLA crowd certainly embraces sexuality with flying colours ..yet they are certainly NO exemplars of people that children are safe around !)
SOLVE POSTED :people who deny their sexualities, especially to the point of denying sex in the first place
Are likely to harm children.
RESPONSE: Who is telling you this flim flam ---some drugstore paperback "documentary" tabloid sort of book, designed to solicit the voyeuristic reader --- written about pedophiles by some hack whose so called "research"
has all the pretend credibility of 'Men Are From Mars. Women Are From Venus' or 'The Courage To Rich' By Suzie Orman ?
Furthermore, yours truly has no sexuality to deny . Yours truly prefers interesting topics like pondering whether there may be little universes of some sort inside every quark , and whether our own universe may be a particle in some vaster superstructure, and the geometric morphologies of plants , and whether plants might have a rudimentary consciousness, and does NOT like prosaic divertissements like sex ...anymore then he would like other prosaic, dime a dozen earthy crass banalities like whoopy cushions , or dime a dozen jokes about excrement .....
SOLVE POSTED :and (as you do) fixating on qualities that are not present in the sexually mature,
RESPONSE: Ha , there 's that laughable turn of phrase "sexually mature", the creme de creme of ballyhooed mystification ! Don't make me laugh .
It's funny how the term 'maturity' used to be ascribed to characteristics like self-discpline , circumspection, dignity, kind devotion to others , contemplativeness, introspection and so on...now get's appended by the rubbish of pop culture and pop discourse to forms of puerile excitement---sexual excitement and its pecadillos ...and excitement and drive totally *contrary* to those previously mentioned characteristics, formerly associated with the word 'mature' !
Screwing for fun ---even if it is with proper birth control protection and among consenting adults (which , at least it better be, otherwise it is even more opprobious)--- is hardly anywhere near congruent with traits like self-discpline, circumspection, dignity ect . That people associate screwing for fun (and even worse sex like activities like fellatio) with maturity, and , like the mendacious twerp: Loki, re-christen such inclinations as "sexual maturity" is the utmost in the mystification of experience !
That phrase "sexual maturity" has to borrow a phrase from Big Daddy in the Tennessee William's play , 'the smell of mendacity', and one can thank the relativist minded sexual libertines and their apologists for such misnomers of humbug and logomancy . They've polluted the culture and eroded the moral fibre of a civilization in so many ways , it is hardly suprising that they would wreak a fast one on daily language, with a lot of goofy new-speak .
SOLVE POSTED :if you had come to me to apply as a foster parent here in My town, i'd show you the door quicker than you can say "fits the profile."
RESPONSE: That just goes to show how inverted the way you think is ---influenced, as you apparently are, by the cocktail party version of "psychology" in the present era ..itself nursed in the mileu of tabloid t.v., and tabloid like "documentary" pulp books about serial killers and such riff raff -
-
Re: "Jason's" post-coital contemplation of butterflies...
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 2:35 PM<< Furthermore, yours truly has no sexuality to deny . Yours truly prefers interesting topics like pondering whether there may be little universes of some sort inside every quark , and whether our own universe may be a particle in some vaster superstructure, and the geometric morphologies of plants , and whether plants might have a rudimentary consciousness, and does NOT like prosaic divertissements like sex >>
A grotesque and whopping falsehood.
"Jason" posts long-winded diatribes about sex on a near-daily basis. His sexual obsessions are well-documented, annotated and extensively commented upon, with "Jason" providing enough marginalia to fill a Library of Babel. Indeed, his obsessions with "filth" seem to offer that vicarious pleasure-by-condemnation so beloved of prudes. He might SAY he's repulsed by immorality, but that's just a pretext for an ongoing masturbatory wallow in it, as witness by the way he projects it onto people like Loki.
It isn't even original as fiction and "Jason's" likeness stares out us from history texts in people like Anthony Comstock or Billy James Hargis. -
-
"Jason's" post-coital contemplation of butterflies...<---Just look at the salacious title heading that Rockstar uses. Rockstar even ascribes vulgar sexual associations to butterflies !
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 4:10 PM
<< Furthermore, yours truly has no sexuality to deny . Yours truly prefers interesting topics like pondering whether there may be little universes of some sort inside every quark , and whether our own universe may be a particle in some vaster superstructure, and the geometric morphologies of plants , and whether plants might have a rudimentary consciousness, and does NOT like prosaic divertissements like sex >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :A grotesque and whopping falsehood.
RESPONSE: On what grounds (other than dubious interpretations of the diatribes I've posted *against* sex ) do you have, Mr.Rockstar , to back up the allegation that the report shown above is "a grotestque and whopping falsehood " ?
You certainly don't likely know a damn thing about what I do offline --and I can tell you the following it does not involve the activity that preoccupies you which you have oft to ascribe to me .
ROCKSTAR RESPONSE:"Jason" posts long-winded diatribes about sex on a near-daily basis. His sexual obsessions are well-documented, annotated and extensively commented upon, with "Jason" providing enough marginalia to fill a Library of Babel. Indeed, his obsessions with "filth" seem to offer that vicarious pleasure-by-condemnation so beloved of prudes.
RESPONSE: Many of the present diatribes *against* liberated sex are a response to people who have already been posting pro-sex statements and innuendo from other participants on the various internet message boards . If people would stop posting sexually- liberated, salacious subject matter in the first palce, then the amount of anti-sex posts from me would reduce considerably .
The very present thread coupled the fact that only a few good folks have posted any relevant posts regarding the intitial topics of the thread (i.e. fiddlehead plants, moths, ethereal paintings) and a number of people have posted here with a "what's your problem?" sort of attitude toward that initial topic , or to defend liberated sex (as is the case with Ms.Solve) is one of the major motives as to why I spend so much time posting diatribes against sex .
That so much internet dialogue is fritterred away on the cheap giggles that sex and sex related activities provide is indeed sad , and shows a lamentable decline in the cultural climate of a civilization . It is indeed quite sad that people would muster up so much enthusiasm and energy to make a flurry of posts finding amusement in sex ; and yet when the intricate marvels of creation like exotic plants , Cecropia moths and ethereal thought provoking paintings are presented in a hyperlink so many people in the present message board can hardly be bothered to comment on them .
Notice that you don't have any relevant comments to make on the intricate forms of the moths shown in the photos , Rockstar, instead you just use the topic as a launching point for another salacious reference to some sex related content--hence the title of the reply post you Rockstar posted ,
" ' Jason's' post coital contemplation of butterflies "
There are so many very interesting topics to think and post about ...but in this present crass/earthy era so many would rather NOT when they can post instead statements in favor of sex , or violent gore filled slasher movies, or political suspense terrorism edge of the seat action adventure scholck movies , all earthy/ crass sorts of content .. Nauseating what a prosaic world it is anymore .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :He might SAY he's repulsed by immorality, but that's just a pretext for an ongoing masturbatory
RESPONSE: I presume that you are using the last adjverb in the sentence fragment shown in excerpt above as hyperbole , or do you even know in what sense you are deploying that word ?
ROCKSTAR POSTED : wallow in it, as witness by the way he projects it onto people like Loki.
RESPONSE: To declare the legacy online of Loki to be immoral is no more of a projection than to declare there are spots on a leopard or a penchant , for stealing on a noted shoplifter . Loki has had a considerable history on tribe of displaying the extended adolescence he is going through ---at a variety of tribes including the present one , with a welter of vulgar statements which find amusement in hideous sexual practices , references to farting, shaking his bottom over dead embryos, grisly violence and the like .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :It isn't even original as fiction and "Jason's" likeness stares out us from history texts in people like Anthony Comstock or Billy James Hargis.
RESPONSE: Again Rockstar takes "literary licesnse " and , hence, fast and loose by comparing me to Billy James Hargis . Billy James Hargis is a protestant Fundamentalist. Yours truly has been attending an Eastern Orthodox (the church which traces its roots to the apostle Andrew one of the apostles of Jesus) .
I regard Protestant Fundamentalism as being a largely spurious phenomenon , in many ways opposed to the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth --- And that Protestant Fundamentalism owes more in doctrine to people like Augustine, Joahn Calvin , Johnathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon, John Nelson Darby and C.I.Scofield than it does to Jesus and the prophets
Yours truly looked up Billy James Hargis, and found the following purported information on him at Wikipedia . If the Wikipedia article on Reverend Billy James Hargis is accurate and does not contain some sort of hearsay, then about the only factor he and I have in common --in terms of cultural ideology---is opposition to abortion and sex education in the schools . That he would accuse Dr. Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement of being communist inspired is especially repulsive ...that tends to be the usual shlock from White Racist conservatives ....The premillenial dispensationalism he envisages is repulsive as well .
Here below is an excerpt from the Wikipedia article on Billy James Hargis .
Drawing on premillenialist theology, Hargis saw the national and world events as part of a cosmic struggle, where the ultimate actors were Christ and Satan. While Communism represented the latter, America, in Hargis' view, was the object of God's love and should return to the Christian ideals he believed it was founded on. He had a "simplistic conception of Americanism consisting of a vague notion of Protestant Fundamentalism and an idealization of the virtues of republicanism".[5]
[edit] Positions and activities
He preached on the evils of sex education and Communism, and urged the return of prayer and Bible reading to public schools long before the modern Religious Right. He referred to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as revolutionary foundations of Marxism. He accused the government, media and pop culture figures — among whom he included the Beatles — of promoting (directly or indirectly) Communism. He said he once wrote a speech for Senator Joseph R. McCarthy. (A subordinate, Rev. David Noebel, was the author of the 1965 work Communism, Hypnotism and the Beatles, which he expanded into Rhythm, Riots and Revolution the following year. Both pamphlets were published by Christian Crusade.)
Hargis alleged that John F. Kennedy was killed by a Communist conspiracy, gaining him notoriety in the immediate post-assassination media furor. Hargis was also a member of the John Birch Society, and making his pro-segregation stance clear, accusing Martin Luther King Jr. of being a Communist-educated traitor, and publishing James D. Bales's anti-King book, The Martin Luther King Story. He also demanded that America should leave the United Nations. He urged his listeners to write to their Representatives and Senators, and was one of the first fundamentalist Christian personalities to urge his audiences to become politically involved, a tactic that was not lost on his successors -
-
Re: Jason vs. the Obvious
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 6:59 PM<< RESPONSE: On what grounds (other than dubious interpretations of the diatribes I've posted *against* sex ) do you have, Mr.Rockstar , to back up the allegation that the report shown above is "a grotestque and whopping falsehood " ? ??
The fact that you post about sex many times a day. To say you have "no sexuality to deny" in light of that is a lie worthy of Baron Munchhausen.
Indeed, your sex life seems to BE posting about sex on the Internet. In this, you're just one more alienated piece of postmodern debris, as sad as any loveless compulsive masturbator. You could whack off twenty times a day or none, the sexual obsession is still there. -
-
Rockstar versus careful analysis.
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 9:05 PM<< RESPONSE: On what grounds (other than dubious interpretations of the diatribes I've posted *against* sex ) do you have, Mr.Rockstar , to back up the allegation that the report shown above is "a grotestque and whopping falsehood " ? ??
ROCKSTAR POSTED :The fact that you post about sex many times a day. To say you have "no sexuality to deny" in light of that is a lie worthy of Baron Munchhausen.
RESPONSE: Let's try again to get Rockstar to think in the abstract, and make note of conceptual distinctions (even though he prefers witty equivocations, instead of accuracy) . (Groans with anticipated tedium at the prospect of trying to teach a supercillous guy like him the beginnings of intelllectual honesty...oooa !)
Posting comments *against* liberated sex is *qualitatively different* from posting in favor of liberated sex .
To refer to me as having purportedly a "sexual obsession" invites a misleading *equivocation*, wherefore you make it ambiguous as to whether you mean an obsession *against* sex, or you mean an obsession *for* sex .
An obsession *against* sex is completely different from an obsession *for* sex .
To also claim (as many are wont to do in the present era of fast half-truths and cocktail party Freudianism) that if a person expresses some vehement and outspoken opposition *against* some notion, or activity, and repeatedly is denouncing that notion or activity , that somehow means that they have some sort of repressed, or latent, liking for what they are often telling people to reject , is a hyped up notion, often touted by the mentally lazy
In another message board , when I raised the argument, that, just as an enviromentalist can have an earnest opposition to the activity of pollution ---without having any secret , latent desire to engage themselves in the act of pollution --- so can a person who is opposed to liberated sex , earnestly denounce liberated sex, *without* having any latent desire to engage in liberated sex .
You, Rockstar, with typical , non-analytical facileness went on with how an enviromentalist could have an earnest desire to do that and then threw in the dismissive canard about how people like me are not the sort of worthwhile people that enviromentalists are ..glossing over the salient focus of the argument .
What you failed to explain is: why you are willing to conceed that on other topics (other than the topic of sex) , that a person can profess that they are against some activity, and the opposition be earnest, and not be some sort of cover for a latent liking for the activity denounced , and yet not conceed that it is possible for a person to be earnestly against liberated sex, *without* harboring some latent , secret liking for it ?
What do you allege it is about the topic of sex, that purportedly makes all apparent statements of fervent opposition to it, *supposedly* some sort of faux opposition ? Members of Mothers Against Drunk Driving do not secretly latently desire to drive drunk, do they? So why then presume that every person who professes to be against non-reproductive sex , somehow allegedly desires it on some latent, secret level ?
(I'd like to think that Rockstar would attempt a specific and analytical earnest answer to that
question , but knowing the track record with him , one fears he may reply with more flippant wit and bluster ) .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Indeed, your sex life seems to BE posting about sex on the Internet.
RESPONSE: Whoa , wait a moment . How can you designate a life lived that has NOT involved any sexual intercourse ; a life lived that does NOT involve any jacking off (I don't do it ...and I'm not sorry if it disappoints that I don't do that)
...by the phrase "a sex life" , in the first place ?
Designating the life of a fellow who does NOT have sexual intercourse and who does NOT jack off ..."a sex life" is the wrong turn of phrase ...the wrong nomenclature, from the start ! So you hinge a claim about me on a term that is a misnomer when "applied" to a life which involves NO sex and NO jacking off (I.e. the term 'sex life' which applies to people who are involved in actual sex , not prudes like me who don't get involved in it)
ROCKSTAR POSTED : In this, you're just one more alienated piece of postmodern debris, as sad as any loveless compulsive masturbator.
RESPONSE: But how can you compare me to some sort of masturbator, when I never jack off ?
ROCKSTAR POSTED :You could whack off twenty times a day or none, the sexual obsession is still there.
RESPONSE: But I do *not* whack off (and again I'm not sorry if that refusal to do so disappoints you) . I'm the aspiring "space cadet" who wants people to discuss highfallutin , ethereal , recondite topics like the patterns on the wings of Cecropia Moths , the patterns of exotic plants , dreamlike French Symbolist paintings ...and one of the main reasons I lament and denounce liberated sex (aside from the intrinsically nasty , repulsive overlays that attend upon that activity) is because we have all so many people here on tribe.net and elsewhere on the internet , who would rather find amusement in discussing earthy topics like sex (or other crass/earthy topics like slasher flicks, revenge , farting and so on ), than they would edifying and contemplative topics such as the patterns on the wings of moths .
Note that you have *not* presented any commentary on the photos of those beautiful moths , Rockstar, other than to ascribe sexual characteristics to them --calling them butterflies and alleging that I somehow contemplate them after coitus . You would rather make references to masturbation in the present thread you visit , then talk about those beautiful moths . What a sad , prosaic world it is any more .....
There are beautiful moths with intriguing colours and intricate patterns on their wings and you would rather just pass such marvels by, rather than comment on them ...and make ribald comments about masturbation . That's what sad, Mr.Rockstar . -
-
Re: Jason's protestations versus Jason's behavior
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 2:04 AM>> Let's try again to get Rockstar to think in the abstract ""
To you, << think in the abstract >> means "don't question the transparent and idiotic justifications "Jason" hands out for his weird sex obsession."
< intelllectual honesty... ::
Something you can't spell and know nothing about.
<< An obsession *against* sex is completely different from an obsession *for* sex . >>
Nonsense. An obsession AGAINST sex (if that's what it even is) is a SEXUAL OBSESSION, one harbored by a sexual being. In your case, you don't seem much interested in anything else BUT sex. despite the butterflies you're hiding behind.
<< on with how an enviromentalist could have an earnest desire to do that and then threw in the dismissive canard about how people like me are not the sort of worthwhile people that enviromentalists are ..glossing over the salient focus of the argument . ?>>
Stop rhetorically freeloading off people like environmentalists who actually do something worthwhile. It's cheap and convinces no one of your honesty.
<< How can you designate a life lived that has NOT involved any sexual intercourse ; a life lived that does NOT involve any jacking off (I don't do it ...and I'm not sorry if it disappoints that I don't do that)
...by the phrase "a sex life" , in the first place ? >>
Because your sex life is posting about sex on the Internet.
<< But I do *not* whack off (and again I'm not sorry if that refusal to do so disappoints you) >>
Even if I believed you, I STILL wouldn''t care. Your behavior is that of an online stalker and sex freak.
Also, stop trying to interest me in your masturbation habits.
<< I'm the aspiring "space cadet" who wants people to discuss highfallutin , ethereal , recondite topics like the patterns on the wings of Cecropia Moths , the patterns of exotic plants , dreamlike French Symbolist paintings >>
By following Loki around, posting about sex all the time and spewing poorly spelled propaganda about other people's sex lives?
Apparently, the truth isn't in you.
<< That's what sad, Mr.Rockstar . >>
Go get an onion and maybe you can squeeze out a few tears of mock-Christian pity. -
-
Mr.Rockstar: the supercillous relativist . Rockstar lost in the gallery of smoke and mirrors. Rockstar's on the defensive now .
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 10:00 AM>> Let's try again to get Rockstar to think in the abstract ""
ROCKSTAR POSTED :To you, << think in the abstract >> means "don't question the transparent and idiotic justifications "Jason" hands out for his weird sex obsession."
RESPONSE: Let us not forget : it is an obsession *against* sex , not an obsession *for* it
Furthermore, you are welcome to question all you like , Mr.Rockstar. But questioning is far *different* from you making presumptions , using Freudian rebuffs , and the fallacy of poisoning the well .
< intelllectual honesty... ::
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Something you can't spell and know nothing about.
RESPONSE: The above reply is the usual technique with Mr.Rockstar. Seldom does he comeback with anything Socratic or a specific rebuttal (One of the few exceptions was when he did ask me what do i mean by the word 'specifc' in another message board ...that was a good reply) . Instead, he tends to use the "you don't know what such and such is " shtick as a comeback .
<< An obsession *against* sex is completely different from an obsession *for* sex . >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED : Nonsense. An obsession AGAINST sex (if that's what it even is) is a SEXUAL OBSESSION, one harbored by a sexual being.
RESPONSE : Again , you equivocate . You deny that an obsession AGAINST sex is completely different from an obsession for sex..you deny that opposites are in opposition , and act *as if* making that same equivocation (where you try to mix up obsession *against* with obsession *for* ) with more gumption and bluster, somehow makes the equivocation allright . Well it doesn't .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :In your case, you don't seem much interested in anything else BUT sex. despite the butterflies you're hiding behind.
RESPONSE : I'm *not* hiding behind the moths. In the present era, where a number of people are cynical in the wrong way (instead of being cynical in the right way...the right way meaning cynical about the mendacious platitudes that try to mislead people into thinking the darkness is somehow a blessing in disguise) if someone declares that they find beautiful moths far more interesting then a prosaic activity like sex, or the topic whether quarks might contain miniture universes, rather than the latest witty slasher film ...there is a tendency of people to make quick dismissals of any claims of sincerity and quip , "Sure, right " , with easy sarcasm . There is a tendency of many people also in this present era to presume that somehow everyone else harbors the same earthy tendencies which the people who presume do (which is a false presumption), as well as for some people to call any protests which entreat people to seek something *beyond* the crass earthy mileu of sex and fart jokes ..."pretentious" .
The term "pretentious" is often used to lambast any calls to go beyond the trite, earthy, crass .
So I tell you I do sincerely lament that the moths and the painting by the French Symbolist painter garners few responses here ...with the exception of good souls like Lori.... who have a fervent interest in beauty .
I'd love to see the present thread swell with lots of relevant comments that refer to the moths , the paintings, the fiddle shaped plants... with earnest awe towards them and not a word about sex ---either to praise or criticize it .
Again, I noticed that you have not made any non-sex related commentary about the beautiful moths ---except to claim I am hiding behind them .It be nice if you'd pleasantly suprise us and make some commentary about the beautiful patterns on the moths, which makes NO reference to sex, nor to that other sex- like activity that you are so infatuated with .
<< on with how an enviromentalist could have an earnest desire to do that and then threw in the dismissive canard about how people like me are not the sort of worthwhile people that enviromentalists are ..glossing over the salient focus of the argument . ?>>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Stop rhetorically freeloading off people like environmentalists who actually do something worthwhile. It's cheap and convinces no one of your honesty.
RESPONSE: The above reply is a great example of a pattern of the way in which you respond, Mr.Rockstar . You present, as a comeback, statements which are full of emotional zing ...appeal to quick and supercillous emotion and try to divert the attention of readers *away* from the *content of the specific argument*, raised by the other person , *over onto* some purported characterization of the person themself, which you are "debating" with . Loki is known for that pattern also . That is very supercillous . It is the sort of technique used by what is often referred to, in popular vernacular, as a "smartass" .
Let us observe the reply post you post next to see if Rockstar will for a change attempt a methodical analytical point counterpoint reply ...one that uses dialectic ....or will he, instead, resort to the shtick again of the sort of comebacks whose upshot is saying to me , "you don't even know what ________ is", or similar wit laced rebuffs of shifting the focus of the discussion on how much of an idiot I am and *away from* the specifics of the topic itself ...using often the tinies scraps of excerpted text from the paragraphs in the prior post so as to better misleadingly reframe what the focus of the previous argument was about ....
<< How can you designate a life lived that has NOT involved any sexual intercourse ; a life lived that does NOT involve any jacking off (I don't do it ...and I'm not sorry if it disappoints that I don't do that)
...by the phrase "a sex life" , in the first place ? >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED : Because your sex life is posting about sex on the Internet.
RESPONSE: So the act of posting *against* sex on the internet can rightly be christened
'a sex life' ????
<< But I do *not* whack off (and again I'm not sorry if that refusal to do so disappoints you) >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED : Even if I believed you, I STILL wouldn''t care. Your behavior is that of an online stalker and sex freak.
RESPONSE: Yes, well the first sentence (in the excerpt from you above) shows the crux of the matter; you wouldn't care... making dismissive statements full of sound and wit , and lacking substance ..for the purpose chastising some idiot who in 2009 is so passe as to exhort people to take philosophy and life seriously and also critizes the sacred cow of sex, is the game of you...heaven forbid that you would get slowed down by specific details and accuracy .
Furthermore, can a person be a "sex freak" if they hate sex and never have engaged in sex and never have engaged in jacking off ?
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Also, stop trying to interest me in your masturbation habits.
RESPONSE: For the umpteenth time , I'm *not* interested in jacking off . Now , that topic is an almost constant preoccupation of what you post about. You are the one, Rockstar, that keeps making references to that activity .
Have you hit a dry spot in literary endeavors , Mr.Rockstar , that you feel you must fill that dry period with puerile amusement... with references to that activity ? As one aspiring author to another, let me tell you that the dry spot will pass if you find sources of inspiration and immerse yourself in them. Try good music played at a higher volume when you want to right, maybe more of a favorite food, perhaps some good wine or cognac, walk in the desert or a forrest or by a river, enjoy the scents of pinecones ect ...and you can get the writing flowing . You don't have to fill the down time with references to puerile amusements ...Writers' block can pass, however, puerile amusements will not make it pass any sooner .
<< I'm the aspiring "space cadet" who wants people to discuss highfallutin , ethereal , recondite topics like the patterns on the wings of Cecropia Moths , the patterns of exotic plants , dreamlike French Symbolist paintings >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :By following Loki around,
RESPONSE: Oh, you mean defending people he harasses like: Rajalee, Roger, Lucy and denouncing the bondage photography he posts (which degrades women) ? .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :posting about sex all the time
RESPONSE: It is *against* sex and it not all the time . Just look at how many threads with many *other* topics I've tried to get people interested in , in this very message board alone ...look how, sadly, other topics hardly get much comments from folks ---but should someone post something against the sacred cow of sex with its time honored cheap giggles , look how fervent people are to comment and defend sex . Why don't more people have fervor for commenting about beautiful moths and plants instead .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :and spewing poorly spelled propaganda about other people's sex lives?
RESPONSE: When those people post to discuss and announce and trumpet those sex lives as some of them are often wont to do they are a fair target for scathing criticism .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Apparently, the truth isn't in you.
RESPONSE: The Truth transcends me . I'm just one mere instrument among others it has .
<< That's what sad, Mr.Rockstar . >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Go get an onion and maybe you can squeeze out a few tears of mock-Christian pity.
RESPONSE :
'I slept last night in a good hotel
I went shopping today for jewels
The wind rushed around in the dirty town
And the children let out from the schools
I was standing on a noisy corner
Waiting for the walking green
Across the street he stood
And he played real good
On his clarinet for free
Now me I play for fortunes
And those velvet curtain calls
I've got a black limousine
And two gentlemen
Escorting me to the halls
And I play if you have the money
Or if you're a friend to me
But the one man band
By the quick lunch stand
He was playing real good for free
Nobody stopped to hear him
Though he played so sweet and high
They knew he had never
Been on their T.V.
So they passed his music by
I meant to go over and ask for a song
Maybe put on a harmony
I heard his refrain
As the signal changed
He was playing real good for free. '
-
-
Re: "Rockstar's on the defensive now" HAHA!! Jason can't live without my game and thus projects...
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 12:19 PM<< Furthermore, you are welcome to question all you like , Mr.Rockstar. But questioning is far *different* from you making presumptions , using Freudian rebuffs , and the fallacy of poisoning the well >>
To you, "questioning you = "poisoning the well". Like most other fanatics, you can't stand being contradicted and spew bile when you are. We've all seen it, so stop cut the wind music.
< intelllectual honesty... ::
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Something you can't spell and know nothing about.
RESPONSE: The above reply is the usual technique with Mr.Rockstar.>>
Yes. I deflate your pompous bullshit USING YOUR OWN WORDS. You can't figure out how I do and WON'T be more careful, so out comes the defensive spew and rote-buzzwords.
<< In the present era, where a number of people are cynical in the wrong way (instead of being cynical in the right way...the right way meaning cynical about the mendacious platitudes that try to mislead people into thinking the darkness is somehow a blessing in disguise) >>
What an uncommonly sensible thing to say!
<< Furthermore, can a person be a "sex freak" if they hate sex and never have engaged in sex and never have engaged in jacking off ? >>
Is that not freakish? Moreover, posting about sex *is* sexual activity, as is writing, painting, dancing, politicking and dreaming about sex.
I can well understand why you might refuse hearing this.
<< ROCKSTAR POSTED :Also, stop trying to interest me in your masturbation habits.
RESPONSE: For the umpteenth time , I'm *not* interested in jacking off . >>
Then stop TALKING about it, Chuckles. HOO-BOY!
<< You present, as a comeback, statements which are full of emotional zing ...appeal to quick and supercillous emotion and try to divert the attention of readers *away* from the *content of the specific argument*, raised by the other person , *over onto* some purported characterization of the person themself, which you are "debating" with . >>
If you don't like what I say, then stop responding to it at such furious length!
<< ROCKSTAR POSTED :By following Loki around,
RESPONSE: Oh, you mean defending people he harasses like: Rajalee, Roger, Lucy >>
Who all *need* "Jason Leary" to misspell words and butcher concepts on their behalf.
They're holding out for a hero. Gotcha.
<< for the purpose chastising some idiot who in 2009 is so passe as to exhort people to take philosophy and life seriously >>
Rot. I'd take you more seriously myself if you did that, along with growing a sense of humor.
<< Have you hit a dry spot in literary endeavors , Mr.Rockstar , that you feel you must fill that dry period with puerile amusement... with references to that activity >>
Two deadlines Friday, plus two shows to cover plus a literary mag wants to reprint an old article of mine, so I'll be spending until early next week revising it and doing the scutwork involved with the old publisher.
Fucking with you every day is just part of my warmup, sonny. Don't lie about people.
<< Try good music played at a higher volume when you want to right, maybe more of a favorite food, perhaps some good wine or cognac, walk in the desert or a forrest or by a river, enjoy the scents of pinecones ect ...and you can get the writing flowing >>
Never had writer's block in my life. Indeed, I don't believe it even exists.
As far as my writerly habits go, well, it's Ethiopian coffee or Earl Grey tea and an occasional puff on a cigar while listening to classical music (I've got Sir Arthur Sullivan's "Overture di Ballo" going this minute) early in my day, followed by loud vintage psychedelic rock when I'm up to speed and cooking, with the occasional hit of high-grade marijuana for contemplation's sake. My capacity for meaningful literary mischief is better later in the day.
I don't drink alcohol.
< time honored cheap giggles >>
What's wrong with giggling?
<< RESPONSE: When those people post to discuss and announce and trumpet those sex lives as some of them are often wont to do they are a fair target for scathing criticism . >>
And when those offended strike back at you, you talk of butterflies. Weird. -
-
Arrête ton char!
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 8:26 PM<< Furthermore, you are welcome to question all you like , Mr.Rockstar. But questioning is far *different* from you making presumptions , using Freudian rebuffs , and the fallacy of poisoning the well >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :To you, "questioning you = "poisoning the well".
RESPONSE: Questioning me is not posioning the well. What is posioning the well, is the facile routine of making some ad hoc allegation, and then claiming that the repeated denials of engaging in some practice (e.g. "a Portney's Complaint) somehow shows that I'm repressing that tendency which you accuse me of , or somehow supposedly lying ...
Not everyone who vehemently denounces something somehow latently likes it nor does it in secret . There have been people who have had that on again /off again repression factor , but to extrapolate from that , that everyone who vehemently denounces some practice somehow latently longs for it or secretly practices it , is a NON-logical and
mentally lazy conclusion to draw ...
ROCKSTAR POSTED : Like most other fanatics, you can't stand being contradicted and spew bile when you are. We've all seen it, so stop cut the wind music.
RESPONSE: You are welcome to present a contrary outlook all you like and will see if it passes the tests of dialectic . What I exhort you to do is not to gloss over distinctions or use terms in an open-ended manner with blurred conceptual boundaries. Logic demands vertical linear thinking .
Lateral thinking and other forms of NONlinear thinking are ANTI-logic .
Furthermore, what is so supposedly bad about being a fanatic ?
Weren't the abolitionists like Lysander Spooner, John Brown, and Sojourner Truth fanatics against the evil practice of plantation slavery ?
< intelllectual honesty... ::
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Something you can't spell and know nothing about.
RESPONSE: The above reply is the usual technique with Mr.Rockstar.>>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Yes. I deflate your pompous bullshit USING YOUR OWN WORDS.
RESPONSE: No, what you do is try to shift the focus of the debate *away* from the import of what is predicated by the words , and over onto supposed characterizations of me as a person . That's NOT analytical, Mr.Rockstar .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :You can't figure out how I do and WON'T be more careful, so out comes the defensive spew and rote-buzzwords.
RESPONSE: What purported 'rote buzzwords' are you referring to, Mr.Rock and Roll ?
<< In the present era, where a number of people are cynical in the wrong way (instead of being cynical in the right way...the right way meaning cynical about the mendacious platitudes that try to mislead people into thinking the darkness is somehow a blessing in disguise) >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED : What an uncommonly sensible thing to say!
RESPONSE: Well I'm glad we agree on something .
<< Furthermore, can a person be a "sex freak" if they hate sex and never have engaged in sex and never have engaged in jacking off ? >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Is that not freakish?
RESPONSE: No. How could it be ? Since when is a refusal to get involved in garish, carnal activities "freakish" .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Moreover, posting about sex *is* sexual activity, as is writing, painting, dancing, politicking and dreaming about sex.
RESPONSE: (1) The open -ended use of the word 'about' is where the seed of equivocation lies . You use the word 'about' in a way that is deliberately ambiguous as to whether the word 'about' means for or against the activity it modifies in the sentence. Posting about something does *not* necessarily mean posting in a way that conveys a liking or desire for that something . If for example a member of the group Mothers Against Drunk Driving were to post article after article obsessively denouncing the activity of drunk driving , that does not mean that such a person is engaged in drunk driving activity , nor that they support drunk driving .
Likewise , yours truly posting against liberated sex , does not mean that I am engaged in a form of sexual activity, nor does it mean that I latently , secretly like sex ....The aboutness, when I post about sex , is an against-it kind of aboutness .
(2) To allege that posting about sexual activity is sexual activity is a quite far flung claim , considering that the person who posts does NOT engage their genitals in the act of internet posting !
ROCKSTAR POSTED :I can well understand why you might refuse hearing this.
RESPONSE: I've been reading every line from you here at the present message board , Mr.Rockstar .
<< ROCKSTAR POSTED :Also, stop trying to interest me in your masturbation habits.
RESPONSE: For the umpteenth time , I'm *not* interested in jacking off . >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Then stop TALKING about it, Chuckles. HOO-BOY!
RESPONSE :You, Mr.Rockstar are the one who keeps making references to that topic . It is you who initiate mentionings of that vulgar practice, which does NOT appeal to me at all ...
In the next reply, are you going to excerpt the phrase , 'that vulgar practice' , away from the rest of the sentence and make some witty remark with the word 'you' (in reference to me), or the name 'Jason', appended to it which ascribes that activity to me , again ?
<< You present, as a comeback, statements which are full of emotional zing ...appeal to quick and supercillous emotion and try to divert the attention of readers *away* from the *content of the specific argument*, raised by the other person , *over onto* some purported characterization of the person themself, which you are "debating" with . >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED : If you don't like what I say, then stop responding to it at such furious length!
RESPONSE: I'm trying to exhort you to use a NON-supercillous method ...one that probes the nityy gritty of dialectic with strictly linear thinking and , hence, explores concepts in sequence ...
<< ROCKSTAR POSTED :By following Loki around,
RESPONSE: Oh, you mean defending people he harasses like: Rajalee, Roger, Lucy >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Who all *need* "Jason Leary" to misspell words and butcher concepts on their behalf.
RESPONSE: Well , you got the part about misspelling words right. I've been known for some typos now and then. Often ahve to make a lot of subsequent repostings to correct the typos . However, I do not butcher concepts. I take the approach Loki calls "pedantic" , instead .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :They're holding out for a hero. Gotcha.
RESPONSE: I'm no hero . There's a kid in the neighborhood though ..who has become my hero. He said words that were simple but were very telling of that which people take for granted . He's a young lad who often marvels at the dragonflies and the birds on the nearby pond . He told me words to the effect that he don't like people that kill people and do bad things ...He's someone I look up to as a hero .
<< for the purpose chastising some idiot who in 2009 is so passe as to exhort people to take philosophy and life seriously >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Rot. I'd take you more seriously myself if you did that,
RESPONSE : But I do take it seriously, very seriously .
ROCKSTAR POSTED : along with growing a sense of humor.
RESPONSE: Yes, but so many events and developments in the world today make me earnestly sad Mr. Rockstar. All the beauty and awe inspiring sights, sounds, smells, and thoughts that people pass by for the sake of life in the proverbial fast lane... and earthy noise . The suffering of people makes me sad ...Just the other day on a television set a relative of mine watches..there was a news report about a 15 year old boy that some trashy creeps in the neighborhood intentionally doused with flammible liquid and set on fire, and last time I heard he is apparently in a burn unit of some hospital with burns over 60 percent of his body ...My late maternal Grandmother used to often say with an earnest note of incredulity , 'what's this world coming to?' .
If I spent the rest of my life lonely and unwed without meeting my dream wife ...living on a diet of bread, water , sardines, and St.Augustine grass (the weed that people have in so many yards here in central Florida) ..I'd rejoice if the next 50 or so years went by without a single case of anybody setting another person on fire, without a single case of people beating their wives , or old people, or their kids, without a single case of people abusing animals, or throwing their pets away, or another forest or scrubland cut down to make way for subdivisions , or another lake or river polluted.
That alone ...the absence of such aforesaid phenomenon would be enough for me to considering humor more often and so on ....
<< Have you hit a dry spot in literary endeavors , Mr.Rockstar , that you feel you must fill that dry period with puerile amusement... with references to that activity >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Two deadlines Friday, plus two shows to cover plus a literary mag wants to reprint an old article of mine, so I'll be spending until early next week revising it and doing the scutwork involved with the old publisher.
RESPONSE: I see. No writer's block for you .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Fucking with you every day is just part of my warmup, sonny. Don't lie about people.
RESPONSE: I just suggested it as a tenative possibility hence I phrased it in the form of a question rather than a question . I did not state it was necessarily the case ...
<< Try good music played at a higher volume when you want to right, maybe more of a favorite food, perhaps some good wine or cognac, walk in the desert or a forrest or by a river, enjoy the scents of pinecones ect ...and you can get the writing flowing >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED : Never had writer's block in my life. Indeed, I don't believe it even exists.
RESPONSE: How come you don't beleive writer's block exists ?
ROCKSTAR POSTED :As far as my writerly habits go, well, it's Ethiopian coffee or Earl Grey tea and an occasional puff on a cigar while listening to classical music (I've got Sir Arthur Sullivan's "Overture di Ballo" going this minute) early in my day,
RESPONSE: Sounds like good music to start the writing day with .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Followed by loud vintage psychedelic rock when I'm up to speed and cooking,
RESPONSE: The music of Jimi Hendrix ---especially the later material such as 'The Burning of The Midnight Lamp ' or '1983 : A Merman I May Be', would be good music to play while writing .So would the music of the San Francisco area band from around the same era , 'The Seeds' .
ROCKSTAR POSTED :with the occasional hit of high-grade marijuana for contemplation's sake. My capacity for meaningful literary mischief is better later in the day.
RESPONSE: It seems counter-intuitive that cannabis would lend itself to contemplativeness..
ROCKSTAR POSTED :I don't drink alcohol.
RESPONSE: I see. Well, wine is supposed to be good for you. It has a chemical named resveritol that is suppoed to be good for the body . My Grandpa liked port .It was sad when in the past couple of months prior to April of the present year (when he died) I had to mix it with corn starch powder when the problem with aspirating somehow related to advanced stage empheseyma caused him to aspirate on thin beverages.
I like white zinfadel, Scotch , cognac, and Maker's Mark whisky .
Occasionally , Fleischman's gin and tonic can be good ...
< time honored cheap giggles >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :What's wrong with giggling?
RESPONSE: Well it has its place . If , however , one prefers cheap and easy giggles from the ribald and earthy to more deep , remarkable, rare , and cosmic interests ...well that's crummy, and helps to foster a crummy , prosaic world .
<< RESPONSE: When those people post to discuss and announce and trumpet those sex lives as some of them are often wont to do they are a fair target for scathing criticism . >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED : And when those offended strike back at you, you talk of butterflies. Weird.
RESPONSE: Cecropia moths, dammit. They are beautiful . Very so ... -
-
Re: Arrête ton char!
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 9:24 AMRockstar ,
Please state what thoughts you have regarding the specific paragraphs above and please comment on those beautiful Cecropia Moths ....Cecropia moths are beautiful . -
-
Re: Arrête ton char!
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 1:11 PMMy feelings about butterflies and moths (and spiders of all kinds) are my own and all are (to me) symbolic in a way I won't share here. Suffice to say, they're a little like the portents the ancient Romans took so much stock in.
-
-
Re: Arrête ton char!
Thu, November 12, 2009 - 1:51 PM<< engaging in some practice (e.g. "a Portney's Complaint) >>
Have you read "Portnoy's Complaint"?
<< Lateral thinking and other forms of NONlinear thinking are ANTI-logic >>
Nonsense and mere prejudice to boot.
<< ROCKSTAR POSTED :Is that not freakish?
RESPONSE: No. How could it be ? Since when is a refusal to get involved in garish, carnal activities "freakish" . >>
You're wired as a human male to fuck and screw. Refusal to do so typically means subnormal sexuality, regardless of the ethical spin put on it.
<< ROCKSTAR POSTED :Moreover, posting about sex *is* sexual activity, as is writing, painting, dancing, politicking and dreaming about sex.
RESPONSE: (1) The open -ended use of the word 'about' is where the seed of equivocation lies . You use the word 'about' in a way that is deliberately ambiguous as to whether the word 'about' means for or against the activity it modifies in the sentence. >>
Nonsense. Sexual activity is sexual activity and sex is the reason for and consequence of our existence. I don't engage in *literary* activity ONLY when I'm sitting here at the machine!
Drunk driving does NOT equal sex, Jason. That's bizarre and sounds like an evasion.
<< I'm trying to exhort you to use a NON-supercillous method ...one that probes the nityy gritty of dialectic with strictly linear thinking >>
You first.
<< for the purpose chastising some idiot who in 2009 is so passe as to exhort people to take philosophy and life seriously >>
ROCKSTAR POSTED :Rot. I'd take you more seriously myself if you did that,
RESPONSE : But I do take it seriously, very seriously . >>
Nonsense, You'd be a lot more careful with words and concepts if you were. You take arguing and self-justification seriously and they're not the same thing by a long shot.
<< ROCKSTAR POSTED : Never had writer's block in my life. Indeed, I don't believe it even exists.
RESPONSE: How come you don't beleive writer's block exists ? >>
I believe what is called "writer's block" means either 1) the writer is out of ideas and doesn't want to admit it or 2) the thing the writer's working on is no good and the "block" is merely the writer's critical sense wrongly interpreted.
<< If I spent the rest of my life lonely and unwed without meeting my dream wife ...living on a diet of bread, water , sardines, and St.Augustine grass (the weed that people have in so many yards here in central Florida) ..I'd rejoice if the next 50 or so years went by without a single case of anybody setting another person on fire, without a single case of people beating their wives , or old people, or their kids, without a single case of people abusing animals, or throwing their pets away, or another forest or scrubland cut down to make way for subdivisions , or another lake or river polluted. >>
You can't make your happiness dependent upon such things.
<< RESPONSE: It seems counter-intuitive that cannabis would lend itself to contemplativeness.. >>
Not at all. Indica strains are very contemplative and send all kinds of weird fancies bubbling in the brain. Sattiva strains provide the "body high" you hear so much about. Imagine marijuana as having the same varying taste, arcana and effects as the sauce winos judge by vintage and label.
Here in Cali, the dispensaries show the same care and micro-fanaticism as single-malt scotch or brandy enthusiasts do.
Weren't the abolitionists like Lysander Spooner, John Brown, and Sojourner Truth fanatics against the evil practice of plantation slavery ? >>
And those like Adolf Eichmann, Jim Jones and Dick Cheney fanatics in the service of visiting as much evil and death on the human race as possible.
Spooner was a fanatic on the subject of human liberty in general, btw.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Loki puts forth trash yet again .
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 8:15 PMNo; it's true: you are boring; your interests are boring. You are a child.
The things you find interesting are rendered repellently odious by your reportage. The only thing interesting about you is your perverted insanity. Look around you. -
-
Re: Loki puts forth trash yet again .
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 8:49 PMpp: You are a child.
you got that right
finally
i
am
inside the wonder is really too great for a brat to consider
children are interested in almost everything if proper diet, exercise, but most important...
direction -
-
Re: Loki puts forth trash yet again .
Tue, November 10, 2009 - 9:07 PMRight on Roger !,
Especially a hispter brat such as Lokifreign .
-
Re: Loki puts out the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 3:44 PMRoger;
it can be a big help to you to check the "in reply to" link in unthreaded mode if you're confused about whom a given respondent is addressing;
in this instance, you have mistakenly assumed I was addressing you; this is not the case (nor is it often).
If you are actually a child, you should log off now, because tribe.net is specifically for adults 18 and up.
Further, I am made of rubber and you are made of shit. Whatever it is you say doesn't matter one tiny little bit. }:) Don't call me names if you don't like childish taunting. Live this way, in general. Be honest - and simply *don't* be a shithead. -
-
Re: Loki puts out the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 4:11 PMpp: 344pm
wow touchy cunt today you are; that time of the month?
re: Yesterday, 8:49 PM
i merely had an observaion
but i need not explain myself to the likes of you...
that takes things out of context and think pointed at you -
-
Re: Loki puts out the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 4:13 PMever hear the term? inner child
you probably heard of it but never 'experienced' it -
-
Re: Loki puts out the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 4:21 PMThe term "inner child" is a mistaken appropriation from the Transactional Analysis therapy model. Unlike most people who use the term, I do, in fact, understand it.
Your own efforts at psychology are woefully undermined by a mistaken belief in the accuracy of your perceptions.
• Try divorcing them from your emotions and see if your conclusions remain the same.
• Avoid terminology from disciplines and fields that you haven't actually been educated in. -
-
Re: Loki puts out the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 9:11 PMpp: • Try divorcing them from your emotions and see if your conclusions remain the same.
421pm
have you ever had a frontal lobotomy...emotions are the color
without color, all remains black and white
not even a sketch
educated? you are out of your mind
the psychiatric profession has now been flushed down the toilet
and the AMA?
j: loki humors me as do the vast on this tribe and heated debate
i need lots of humor...
-
-
-
Re: Loki puts out the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 4:45 PM>>wow touchy cunt today you are; that time of the month? <<
mmmmm touchy cunt.
er, but yeah; it's probably lunar or something; no tolerance for bullshit, today. -
-
Re: Loki puts in the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 6:03 PMLOKI POSTED :er, but yeah; it's probably lunar or something; no tolerance for bullshit, today.
RESPONSE: Roger, don't let that ingrate Lokifreign dissuade you from visiting the thread. Notice that vulgar ne'er do well Loki has litterred the thread that was supposed to be about edifying and scientifically interesting topics and art , with more of the puerile adolescent trash --which tends to be what he specializes in (along with mystification )
-
-
-
Re: Loki puts *in* the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 4:30 PMLOKI POSTED :If you are actually a child, you should log off now, because tribe.net is specifically for adults 18 and up.
RESPONSE: For adults like Lokifreign, who can regail people with such stupendous adult "mature" content at the TMI tribe such as how he would like an artificial hymen on his bottom .
LOKI POSTED : Further, I am made of rubber and you are made of shit.
RESPONSE: You ever take a gander in a mirror .?
LOKI POSTED :Whatever it is you say doesn't matter one tiny little bit. }:)
RESPONSE: On the contrary , what Roger says matters a lot. Especially if he is denouncing the postmodern hipster
trash from you Lokifreign .
LOKI POSTED :Don't call me names if you don't like childish taunting.
RESPONSE :Don't act like the person referred to by those names if you don't ant to be called them .
LOKI POSTED : Live this way, in general. Be honest - and simply *don't* be a shithead.
RESPONSE: You go suck an egg , you postmodern relativist . -
-
Re: Loki puts it *in* the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 4:33 PMRoger is not the subject of the observation, ass;
ffs, you are worthless, evil, and stupid. I pray for you to die, now. -
-
Re: Loki puts it *in* the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 5:57 PMLOKI POSTED :Roger is not the subject of the observation, ass;
RESPONSE: That's good. You better not post any more trash at him .
LOKI POSTED : ffs, you are worthless, evil, and stupid. I pray for you to die, now.
RESPONSE: Keep your hardcore bondage pornography photos away from peoples' children, degenerate , Lokifreign .What you think about me isn't ultimately important . Leave other people alone , postmodern hipster . -
-
Re: Loki puts it *in* the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 6:20 PMMake me. -
-
Re: Loki puts it *in* the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 7:20 PMJason is putting us on. We're supposed to find it to be as much fun as he does.
-
Re: Loki puts it *in* the trash yet again
Wed, November 11, 2009 - 8:29 PMI'm trying to intimidate you into leaving Roger and other people alone , Lokifreign .
Guess I'll have to keep trying . At first you don't intimidate a degenerate..try, try again ...
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
