--- In [email protected], doctordumbass@... <no_reply@...> wrote: > > DD: almost a freak of nature here, Barry -- I've never > seen someone try so hard to justify their nasty behavior. > For the way you continue to use the 'C word' (how quaint), > you are the only cunt around here - a worthless cunt at > that. Now, why not drop it, and write more essays about > the wind blowing through you, or the brain's neuro-plasticity?
Thank you for your thoughts, Jimbo. You checking in on this subject does raise a question for me, and thus I'll make an exception and reply to one of your posts. You see, I'm curious about the time you spent pretending to be a woman here on Fairfield Life. Back during that time, did you feel as Judy does that your female private parts were abhorrent and disgusting? Curious minds want to know. :-) > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Following up on my little essay, I'd like to thank two women here > > for proving my point for me. One declared that the use of the C word > > referring to her indicated that the person using it "hated" her, which > > is as ludicrous as it is self-obsessed. One refers to someone using > > that word to blow them off and dismiss them as being so petty, mean- > > spirited, and insignificant as to not be worthy of interfacing with at > > all, *much less* worthy of "hating." It's a word indicating that the > > person is about to be *forgotten*, not "hated." Maybe the person > > in question really can't tell the difference between the two concepts. > > > > The other woman said something so astounding that it's difficult > > to believe she said it. Ascribing the thoughts to a man she imagines > > calling another man the C word, she claimed that this meant that > > he found this man "as abhorrent and disgusting ... as a woman's > > private parts." > > > > Wow. Can you say "self hatred?" I think you can. > > > > I, for one, have never found women's private parts the least bit > > abhorrent and disgusting. To the contrary, I have always found > > them quite attractive and enticing, as has my main man Bruce > > Cockburn: > > > > http://www.uulyrics.com/music/bruce-cockburn/song-mango/ > > > > But this *does* help me to understand why some women react > > as strongly as they do to hearing the C word. Maybe they've been > > raised to believe that their *own* private parts are as "abhorrent > > and disgusting" as they imagine men imagining them. How sad. > > > > At any rate, I rest my case on the argument that many women lose > > their minds when they hear this word, and not only overreact in > > the moment of hearing it or reading it, but for many moments to > > come. Some women seem to hold on to the faux outrage they > > express over this word for months or years, or possibly longer. > > > > Can you imagine a man reacting that way to being called a "dick?" > > > > Can you even imagine a woman -- if they're actually claiming that > > being called the C word is saying that they look like a woman's > > private parts -- reacting that way to being called a "vagina?" > > > > But use the C word and they lose all reason and go bat shit crazy. > > And then they *stay* bat shit crazy for years. > > > > All over a word. Go figure. > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > As many have figured out, I'm somewhat of a lover of words. I use them > > > to pay the bills when writing for work, and I use them to pay the > > muses > > > when writing for pleasure. > > > > > > I've written in English, and a little bit in French and Langue d'Oc, > > but > > > along the Way I've also written in other non-spoken but useful > > languages > > > with odd names like COBOL, FORTH, BASIC, and Java. Although some would > > > not consider the things written in the latter languages "writing," I > > do. > > > And although some would not consider the things written in English > > > "programming," I do. You string words together in a certain syntax so > > > that when they are read -- when the program "runs" -- they achieve a > > > certain effect. > > > > > > Possibly because I work with words every day, I have no fear of them. > > > There is not a word that anyone could hurl at me as an epithet or use > > to > > > describe me that "pushes my buttons" or provokes any kind of defensive > > > or offended reaction. Maybe I'm just drawn that way, or maybe I spent > > > too much time in my youth listening to Lenny Bruce and Richard Pryor > > and > > > George Carlin to ever be offended by some of the words that others > > seem > > > to be offended by on a regular basis. I dunno. All I know is that > > > although there may be things on this planet that offend me, words > > aren't > > > one of them. They're just words. > > > > > > Knowing that not everyone is like this, however, I admit to sometimes > > > using words that I know will provoke reactions in others purposefully. > > > Sometimes, as in Road Trip Mind, I do this to provide a contrast that > > > helps to define what the book is about, which is Tantra, the > > > reconciliation of opposites. I present a character (myself or others) > > > doing something or saying something that almost everyone on the planet > > > would perceive as WAY spiritual, and then immediately follow it with > > the > > > same person swearing like a sailor, or even throwing the F word into > > the > > > middle of the spiritual rap itself. The whole idea is to provoke > > > cognitive dissonance, and remind people that nothing is black and > > white, > > > and that no one is either all good or all bad, all spiritual or > > > all...uh...whatever it is that uptight people think the opposite of > > > spiritual is. > > > > > > Other times I use...uh...colorful words to provoke a reaction in those > > I > > > am writing to. Some don't like this much, especially those who have a > > > rather STRONG attachment-aversion reaction to those words. Hearing > > those > > > words or seeing them in print *definitely* pushes their buttons. > > > Consistently. Over and over and over and over, like Rush Limbaugh > > > reacting to the word "Obama." > > > > > > Two words that consistently seem to provoke such strong reactions here > > > on Fairfield Life seem to me, this morning, curiously similar. Both > > are > > > "four letter words," and in fact only one letter separates one from > > the > > > other. > > > > > > When people hear or read the one that contains an "L" as its third > > > letter, many of them get sorta...uh...uptight. They don't LIKE the > > > suggestion that the organization they identify with and have been part > > > of for decades is being described using that word. They feel > > *offended* > > > that this word has been used to describe the org they are part of, as > > if > > > it has somehow been slandered or lessened as a result of this word > > being > > > applied to it. And they feel this in spite of the fact that only one > > of > > > the five definitions of the word in Merriam Webster is even slightly > > > negative: "a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its > > > body of adherents." Go figure. One would think that members of a group > > > that considers itself unorthodox (compared to "lesser" traditional > > Hindu > > > teachings) would be proud of that lack of orthodoxy being pointed out. > > > But nooooo. > > > > > > The reason for this, of course, is that this particular C word has > > taken > > > on a life of its own since the 80s, and has come to be associated in > > the > > > general public's mind with things like Jonestown and Charlie Manson. > > The > > > definition that resounds in people's minds when they hear this word no > > > longer has anything to do with its actual dictionary definition. > > > > > > Change one letter, and you've got the other C word. That word tends to > > > provoke a strong reaction in Americans as well, especially if they are > > > of the feminine persuasion. This is not so true in Britain and in > > > Australia, where it is a word more often used to describe men than > > > women. There, calling a man by this name in a pub evokes images of a > > guy > > > who is mean-spirited, kinda clueless, and who whines a lot. Calling a > > > woman by that name in those countries evokes pretty much the same > > > images. When I use the word, I am employing this British definition of > > > it. > > > > > > In America, with its long, long, long, long history of sexual > > repression > > > and fear of even *talking* about things related to sexuality, much > > less > > > naming them explicitly, the word has developed other connotations. > > Women > > > tend to hear it and go ballistic, as if they were black and someone > > > (someone not also black, that is, because then it'd be OK) had just > > > called them the N word. It is perceived as the Ultimate Insult, one > > that > > > can never be forgotten or forgiven. > > > > > > Seems like a lot of trouble to go to over a simple little word that > > > first appeared in the English language in the year 1230 and was used > > > regularly for many centuries without any pejorative meaning attached > > to > > > it. But if people want to get all uptight about it and thus > > > *demonstrate* their attachments and aversions, I guess it's their > > right > > > to do so. > > > > > > But it's still *my* right to use either of the two C words from time > > to > > > time if I feel like doing so. In my opinion the non-attached members > > of > > > this forum won't get their panties all in a twist as a result of > > hearing > > > or reading either word. Many of those who do IMO *already* have their > > > panties in a twist, pretty much 24/7, and these words just provide an > > > opportunity for them to try to work those twists out by dancing the > > > dance of the righteously indignant. > > > > > > Some may even get a little bent and outraged behind this essay, and do > > > the righteously indignant panty-straightening dance, even though I > > have > > > actually used neither word in it. Their call. Seems kinda silly to me. > > > > > >
