|Mr. Rowlands, |
Those were cheap shots, and a disingenuous comment you made. Both Sam and I were primarily concerned over the overall crassness that some were exhibiting on the theme, and the manner/frequency in which it was being discussed in general. I stated before, that Mr. Kilbourne’s article on the subject was praised by me on his thread, and Mr. Sciabarra’s article on the subject is scholarly and has my admiration. As to “single issue site”, OK fine - you win, a poor choice of words (and overly dramatic) – better stated; ‘an over-emphasis on sexual themes with an unusually high number of crass comments’.
Racy comments and sexual overtones are one thing ( I make them myself), but there is a line that crosses over into the degraded. Perhaps I am guilty of being overly prudish or ‘square’, as you wish. But, there was no need for you to bring it up again. It was unnecessary for you to post those comments in the general forum, the issue was over and done with for me, but you seem to enjoy a quick dig.
Your statements that imply the real problem for these guys, "was something else", is easy to discern- no need to play word games, just call us ‘homophobes’ and be done with it. I cannot speak for Sam, but only for myself. I can only say, that whatever your personal interpretations may be, my comments were made to you in private and without the sarcasm of your post.
My ‘problem’ is with crassness in general, and any overall degradation of discourse. The degraded manner in which this subject was being discussed (with frequent crass comments on sodomy, spin off topics on s&m, back and forth banter on ‘converting’ others, homophobes ect…) was in my opinion a degradation of the discourse on an objectivist web site. And yes, the natural aversion that the majority of males have for homosexual acts is a factor in my response. An aversion to homosexual practices is a natural and very common factor (which I bet that YOU share as well) among the overwhelming majority of heterosexual males. As Regi said, ‘aversion’ and ‘phobia’ are not the same thing. I make no apologies for my statements – their intent was no more than to state that if it becomes commonly believed that Solo is strongly or overly focused on gay themes (or any other sexual theme), especially in a non-intellectual manner of discourse – that that would hurt the site.
As I stated to you in private, I was not ever going to bother you again. Perhaps after you respond to my comments, and articulately comment on my; racism, bigotry, sexism, homophobia, lack of self-esteem, intrinsicism, evasion, big nose, and my in-grown toenail – perhaps then we can BOTH leave it alone permanently.
George W. Cordero
(Edited by George W. Cordero on 9/13, 7:29pm)