Risk is involved in the model Gabby. I really wouldn't want you to think I don't like you - this making me vulnerable to certain responses etc. I wouldn't want to be as soppy and potentially patronising as to accord you my unconditional positive affirmation (though in a sense you have it). We have to guess a lot. Some might say your 'love' training failed - though if it did I might be saying 'thank goodness for that'.
Habermas got a lot as stick as 'the Professor' for making a Reason so strong one could only follow it like a swastika, and Dawkins as 'the Cardinal' for being so religiously atheist. It's easy enough to learn, say, the social model of disability and then make a fair living patronising disabled people (correct form 'people with disabilities) or letting your blind mate cross the road on his own and not pull him out of the way of a speeding truck for fear of offending the model. Indeed, one can often find social models claimed by academics were in activist practice amongst ordinary folk long before someone turned them to copyright. The blind guy silly enough to cross the road with me discovered this in the disability field. He is now a university teacher, having been written off by former colleagues as better suited to basket-weaving. They knew all the caring jargon and couldn't spot the brightest student we'd had for ten years. Suggestions on 101 uses for dropped-off Gabby fingers to the Other please ... On Saturday, 17 January 2015 20:25:45 UTC, Gabby wrote: > > Using the term Hate Speech is already touching an American taboo and not > only the act itself? That explains a lot...interesting. It is not the Love > Thyself that I found particularily interesting but how it is being combined > with the Other. I have been socialized in the "Love thyself AS ... the > other..." tradition with both sides having to be equal all the time. The > sequencing idea of the AND with the calculated result on the Other really > shocked me in all its wrongness in the beginning here. It took me very long > to get used to this logic and I am delighted to see how I was able to type > this word combination without my fingers falling off afterwards. As for the > Hate Image, here in Germany our democratically selected political > representatives keep on deciding that the swastika still accounts as such. > And I don't expect that decision to change soon, which is okay for me. > > Am Samstag, 17. Januar 2015 schrieb 'facilitator' via "Minds Eye" : > >> Using the term "Hate speech" is the beginning of the "Final Solution". I >> am not sure where the term "Love thyself" came from but I am sure someone >> with a degree in psycho-ology came up with it. There is a quote however >> from someone in the first century: "Love is not easily offended". The onus >> is not on the one who excursus their right(s) but rather on the one with a >> nervous trigger finger. >> As an artist I would like too see the "select" decide for the masses what >> a "Hate Image" looks like. >> >> I can tell you with absolute certainty that a person with a strong faith >> is unmoved by derogatory inferences. >> >> -- >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/minds-eye/Jxct69tTcVo/unsubscribe. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
