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 unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Forward one pageLast Page


Post 20

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 7:47amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Byron,

"I hope someone who grew up in an Arab culture could enlighten me." 

 

A Lebanese women colleague of mine from a previous job told me that in Arab Muslim countries male homosexuality is very common.

 

She was a westernized Muslim herself, so it is not as if she invented the story out of spite against Muslims.

 

Her explanation was that it occurred so frequently because female sexuality is so suppressed in those countries, whereas male sexuality is not.

 

That sounds like an unlikely explanation to me, but that is what she said.


Post 21

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 8:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The sexual repression of women by Arab societies was one explanation I heard from Army intelligence (what an oxymoron!) for the male homosexuality I observed in Afghanistan and Iraq.  I think Ed's, Philipp's, and Marcus's posts reinforce that view, I think.  It would make sense, especially with the homosexual behavior by prison inmates, who are also denied sex with the opposite sex.  Wasn't T.E. Lawrence also gay, though?  He seemed like it in the movie "Lawrence of Arabia".

By the way, I thought that "Fairy Brigade" joke was funny.


Post 22

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 8:55amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"It would make sense, especially with the homosexual behavior by prison inmates, who are also denied sex with the opposite sex."

Yes Byron, interesting analogy.

I think you do have a point there. She may well have been right.

You see, if one is constantly told as a young man that you are not allowed to have any physical contact with females nor to even look or talk about females in a sexual way...well maybe those homosexual tendencies do come out more.

You see what would happen to us "males" if we couldn't dream about Jennifer's panties?

She's even got Linz going :-)

(Edited by Marcus Bachler on 11/10, 9:02am)


Post 23

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 9:49amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jennifer said:
Note that I did not specify *whose* panties would be in the bags...)  :P

I say:
Most likely Linz's. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on what side of the fence you're on;)

Adam
(Edited by Adam Buker on 11/10, 9:52am)


Post 24

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 11:45amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"Most likely Linz's. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on what side of the fence you're on ;)"

Granted.  And maybe the hoisting of the red panties on a flagpole could mark the official beginning of SOLOC4? :-)

 


Post 25

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 12:00pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Note that I did not specify *whose* panties would be in the bags...)  :P
Jennifer,

               hmm..., if you're handing out the bags, I just want to make a note that I will of course follow code with regards to compensation for any referrals.

regards!

Jeanie   ))(*)((


Post 26

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 12:07pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
You see, if one is constantly told as a young man that you are not allowed to have any physical contact with females nor to even look or talk about females in a sexual way...well maybe those homosexual tendencies do come out more.
Quite seriously, what if I proposed:

"if one is constantly told as a young man that you are not allowed to have any physical contact with males nor to even look or talk about males in a sexual way...well maybe those heterosexual tendencies do come out more."

I personally accept the Freudian/Reichian/Foucauldian notion that infants have a general 'polymorphous' sexuality which is, in most persons, reified by the prohibitions of parential upbringing.  If your theory above is correct, consider that however great the social repression of heterosexual tendencies, the repression of homosexual tendencies is much, much greater.

I don't at this time wish to lengthily debate the issue, but the first theory does suggest the second.

my regards,

Jeanie Ring   ))(*)((


Post 27

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 12:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"If your theory above is correct, consider that however great the social repression of heterosexual tendencies, the repression of homosexual tendencies is much, much greater."

Ah, but you see it is a double edged sword:

Jennifer drops her red panties, and then Linz, completely out of character, comes running for them :-)



Post 28

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 7:58pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'll bet in about a thousand years, we could ~NEVER~ figure out who might have authored or sent such garbage.

It is good to see these healthy SOL's let it roll right off their back.

Post 29

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 - 8:05pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I decided to edit my previous post, as it was rather cranky.  It just so happened that while I was in said cranky state, a "Random Article" popped up at precisely the right time.  The article was "On Belly-Laughers and Anal Retentives."  As I read through its message thread, I was reminded why I am here in the first place.

And John Newnham, your post is what made me burst into a great big belly laugh.  ;)

I spent a decade as far away from "The Movement" as I could get, because I had never encountered such a dour, dull, lifeless crowd of people.  (Newsflash: Highly intelligent does not have to equal vapid.)  SOLO was my place to say "Piss Off!" to those people.  And so it shall remain.

Now, get those panties on a flagpole.  (Yours, Linz, not mine.)




 
 
 
 
 
 
 

(Edited by Jennifer Iannolo on 11/10, 10:14pm)


Post 30

Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 8:30pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Nat Panty strikes again! This email I got today says:


Joey, the Italian Salami

You've been travelling down the Hershey Highway too long, my friend. Time to
butch up and get away from Barbara Branden, the notorious fag hag, who loves all
the fairy boys but never chowed down on one of her own. I wonder why?

Anyway, your a handsome chap so remember to keep your head down in Fallujah and
give my good friend Lindsay Puff Daddy an extra strong goose.

Best regards,
Nathaniel T. Panty, the ferocious fag

P.S. Tell Ironpanties Iannolo to loosen up and be more benevolent with what she
has.
--


Um, Jen, Nat said to tell you to loosen up and be more benevolent with what you have, so...you know...um, be more benevolent and stuff.

Um, Barbara, Nat said I have to butch up and get away from fag hags, so, um, guess I should go and butch up or something...

Um, Linz, Nat said to give you an extra strong goose, but I don't know what that means, must be a Kiwi thing...

And I still ain't wearing the robes!
___________________________________

Post 31

Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 8:51pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
At a wedding this summer, I had the pleasure of speaking with a relatively prominent TV journalist who travelled with the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan during the US led invasion in 2001.  She spent weeks in remote areas with them.  She told me that homosexual behavior was actually quite common there, and that it was normal for some of the wealthier older men to have affairs with several teenage boys. Who woulda thunk it?


Post 32

Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 8:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit


Joe, I resent Nat Panty's criticism of me. I am definitely not a hag.

By the way, aren't you giving him precisely what he wants by passing on his notes?

Barbara

Post 33

Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 9:16pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Didn't mean to offend you by passing it on, Barbara, thought I was belittling the poster...but you may be right, in that he's getting the attention he's after. Funny thing is that I am not mad, as much as I am curious as to who it is...

And I was curious if anyone else got personalized posts...my only concern is if there is any viruses involved.

Post 34

Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 9:20pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I got one too, Joe.  Though it seems I went from a Goddess (yesterday) to Ironpants (today).  Perhaps it's because I criticized him for a spelling error.  ;)

Post 35

Thursday, November 11, 2004 - 10:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks, Jen.

And Barbara, OF COURSE YOU'RE NOT A HAG!

For you breeders out there :), in case you don't know the term, "fag hag" is an affectionate term for women who hand enjoy the company of gay men. At least I think it's affectionate, don't really hang out in the gay scene enough to say. I think Grace from WILL AND GRACE would be considered one, and she's not a hag. So please don't be too offended, Barbara.



Post 36

Friday, November 12, 2004 - 1:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I haven't received any of this trash myself but Barbara, you are definitely not a hag :-)

You'd think these morons would have better things to do! Has anybody actually checked if that is a fake email address?


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 37

Friday, November 12, 2004 - 5:43amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
In a vain effort to elevate the tone of this discussion, now swimming in debauchery and sin, I'd like to take the time out to present a bibliographical message.

Byron wrote:  "Wasn't T.E. Lawrence also gay, though?  He seemed like it in the movie "Lawrence of Arabia"."

I know there's been some discussion of the film (which I loved) in another thread, but as I recall, Lawrence himself didn't admit to being gay, though he was the victim of homosexual rape while imprisoned by the Turks (it's alluded to in the restored version of the film).  It should be noted, however, that one film critic said that if Peter O'Toole (who played T. E. Lawrence in the film), with his flowing blond hair and sparkling eyes and bronzed skin, were any more beautiful, they would have had to re-name the movie "Florence of Arabia."

Finally, one last reference for you:  There is actually a novel entitled Fag Hag, by Robert Rodi, which features a gay character who reads the work of Ayn Rand.   I'll quote from my Ayn Rand, Homosexuality, and Human Liberation SOLO monograph:

Robert Rodi also brings a Randian sensibility to his novels, such as Fag Hag (1993)—with its gun-toting, Rand-reading hero, Lloyd Hood—and Drag Queen (1995). Rodi has said: "The simplest and greatest appeal of Rand to me, as a gay youth, was that her world was a meritocracy. People there were judged by the quality of their minds and works, and by nothing else, which certainly appealed to me at that particular time, beleaguered as I was by religious and societal disapproval (and worse)"

Okay, all of you now can return to your sinful ways.  :)

BTW, I only received the first of the Fairy Brigade emails.  Whoever sent it must know me, however.  To refer to me as "Chris Pizzabarra," must know that Pizza is a Staple in the Sciabarra household. 


Post 38

Friday, November 12, 2004 - 10:54amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Chris-

I ran across an account of Lawrence's rape in the oddest of all places; in the books of my kissing friend Andrea Dworkin; whatever else one may say about her, at times her nuttiness is remarkably evenhanded, and she goes into some detail from Lawrence's autobiography when discussion rape as a larger issue.  I honestly always felt, watching the film, that Lawrence's breakdown near the later portion didn't make sense; her notes made a lot of things clear.  In retrospect, the performance of the unrestored version is simply superb in implying such a lacuna... and one that makes me shudder; I have known too many working girls show scars of the same awful disintegrations. 

As for whether Lawrence is gay, I don't know.  But there is little doubt me that in some sense the film is; the romance of the British officer an the exclusively masculine society of many Victorian institutions quietly famous for homosexuality is an old tradition; I would say one factor was the (rather nasty) classical education of the time; if the British upper classes took Aristotle as their common sense, they took the Iliad of Achilles and Patroclus as their first erotic imaginations. 

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

And Chris, I am simply ashamed of you for your indulgences in false dichotomies!  "Elevated tone" vs. "swimming in debauchery and sin", indeed!  This is a set of irrational alternatives that cry for dialectical integration, and especially as both the conceptual and historical models clearly exist for the confluence of an elevated debauchery.  I do indeed hope the good Doctor Diabolical Dialectician, simultaneously and without contradiction Chris the Slut, can escape such dualistic restraints.  'Tis not a choice of left or right; in this case, the right hand knows very well what the left hand is doing.  Surely we can reach that precise moment where such motion is fulfilled, negated, and transcended?

Dear Dr. Sciabarra, I do hope you are not slipping.

my regards,

Pyrophora Cypriana   ))(*)((   - "not all those who wander are lost"
 


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 39

Friday, November 12, 2004 - 11:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jeanine, re the false alternative of "elevated tone" vs. "swimming in debauchery and sin" ... well, yes, of course I'm not slipping.  But sometimes the pendulum has to swing far to the right, after swinging far to the left, just as a corrective. 

And in the elevated synthesis, I'd never favor right hand or left hand; I use both hands.  In fact, every appendage becomes actively involved in the orgasmic, uh, organic whole. 


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.