About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Page 2Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 9:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Oh, my God!

Post 1

Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 10:19pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Imagine my conundrum, serious, humorous, or fetish love?

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 11:02pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
That's too hilarious! (and sad)

What a great writer.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 3

Thursday, August 27, 2009 - 11:07pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks. Steyn's not bad either.

Post 4

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 2:48amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I don't think "muff-divers" etc is appropriate language for this site, even quoting some third party. I'm a gay guy what are you going to call me? C-sucker? Very disappointing.

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 5

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 3:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yeah, I can see how one might be offended, Richard, but the context is appropriate, as always, with Steyn.   If I had to pick a phrase from that article, that's the one I'd chose, too.

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 6

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:13amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yeah, Teresa. Where were you on that one? Lets see a little more censorship around here. People can't be allowed to say things others don't like.

Post 7

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 8:56amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Oh, God help me before I sin again! I must . . . can't . . . resist . . . the temptation to make a joke...argGhl!



Post 8

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Well, what might the proper language etiquette be? What are our principles - I mean, without referring to PC or campus, word-Nazi standards. I seem to remember Ted writing some exploratory thoughts on Objectivist etiquette.

Richard, speaking as a gay man, says he would object to being called a c-sucker, and I can understand that, despite being a fairly old, white, straight guy. But Steyn, whose raw talent should earn him more liberty than others, didn't use the noun vagina, or one of the more direct slang nouns, like c--t. It seems to me that a muff, is almost once-removed and kind of like a tush in its linguistic softness. But then, not being a lesbian I don't have an emotional take on this.

Thoughts?

Post 9

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
This just seems like hypersensitivity to me. First of all, the manufactured shock involved here involves a shifting of context. Transmuting a pithy use of schoolyard slang used generally within an article to a hard nosed verbal attack directed at someone PERSONALLY is just dishonest. As is the "What are you going to call me? C-sucker?" I'm not going to call you anything. Except hypersensitive. Nor has anyone else within this little exchange, and I don't particularly acknowledge guilt for what some other guy did to piss you off. If you think the author is a douche, say so, as this is an article discussion. But come one, calling for a little censorship because someone who says "muff diver or duff donor" MIGHT lead to offensive silly characterization of the sexuality you identify with is just silly.

Not to mention C**ksucker is way out of the league of "muff diver or duff donor". I've been around some pretty high testosterone caveman organizations, and I've honestly seen that term hurled to insult straight guys more than anything. Not that terms aren't out there that are equivalent, but c**ksucker sure as hell isn't one of them.

BTW, Do gay guys have a silly term for straight dudes? Just curious. If someone that knows posts it I promise not to emo-rage.

Post 10

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:27pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
As an ass bandit, I have to say I never thought muff diver was considered as anything butt funny. And a search of google shows the term refers more to the action than a class of person. Steyn is a metrosexual. Even though he has a book published on show tunes, my understanding is that he himself prefers muffon. He's the last person from whom I would take offense at his choice of words. I quoted that line because he alluded to Heinlein.

Post 11

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ryan, the only term that doesn't amount to mere mysogyny (references to fish and escargot) is "breeder."

Post 12

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:43pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
ugh, lame. That one isn't silly or fun at all.

Post 13

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:49pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Well don't blame me, I'm bi!

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 14

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:50pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ah, a switch hitter. Now I have to brainstorm a funny epitaph for straight people.

Post 15

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 4:54pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Yeah, Teresa. Where were you on that one? Lets see a little more censorship around here. People can't be allowed to say things others don't like.

I have no control over loose cannons like Ted, or you, for that matter!


Post 16

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 5:04pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mwah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha hah!

Post 17

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 5:06pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
A loose cannon :) nice. I'm 1/3 of the way to an action movie fantasy. Now if I can only find a police commissioner to demand that I turn in my badge and my weapon.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 18

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 8:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I come on this site for something inspiring, uplifting, or insightful. To reduce another person to a "performer of a sexual act" is degrading and insulting. I don't see how this quote offers anything of value. What captivating insight has this offhand reference to cunnilingus and "defective semen" brought to our attention, here?

I don't care about PC thought police. I care about politeness and a certain level of respect for other human beings. Are lesbians enemies of Objectivism? I'd be appalled if so-called objectivists were casually reposting "the funny thing Mark Steyn said about jungle bunnies", and I think if you gave a moments thought you would agree.

And so many of you say I'm advocating "censorship"! That's disappointing from supposed intellectuals. If you knew anything about censorship, you'd know that this is a private site and censorship applies only to government action- if the person running this site chose to take down something they find offensive or that is counterproductive to the purpose of the site it's not censorship. Jeez- this is Objectivism 101, guys.

Bottom line- If I were a lesbian who had read Rand and was excited about learning more and I came on this site, one of the first things i would see right now is a joke being made at the expense of "Muff divers". I think I'd turn the other way thinking very poorly of Objectivism. My guess is that if you approve of this kind of post you'll say "good riddance" to that lesbian. If this is a site for bigots now I don't belong here either. We need every mind we can get these days.

PS- re: the author, his commentary about the lack of sperm donation and the illegality of selling sperm etc is valid and this would be an interesting article if the tone weren't so glib and condescending. My objection is to seeing "muff-diver" on the home page of RoR. Are there no standards even here? And if we have no sense or courtesy how in hell do we hold ourselves up as any example for others?

Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Post 19

Friday, August 28, 2009 - 9:02pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Richard,
I'm not trying to insult you but I notice you have no qualms about using "muff diver" and "c-sucker" in your posts, to make a point obviously. You have 100% control over what you personally write but whoops there you go, multiple times. If those words should never be on this website (standards and all) how do you explain their presence in your very own posts? Do you deny to others privileges you grant to yourself?

Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Page 2Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.