Never admit to anything personal, codify & render general

[alexsarll]

Over the course of my life I have seen a few things which would shatter frailer minds. But I still never thought I'd see Sir Ian McKellen dressed as Britannia, still less that this would be deemed suitable entertainment for children. His other outfits were all fairly disturbing too, to be frank. If the Brotherhood or the Fellowship saw their boss looking like that, it would all have fallen apart. It's strange seeing a pantomime again once one has reached adulthood - I remember a vague awareness that certain jokes were Rude, and laughing because when you're a kid Rude = Funny, but now I understood them I realised they're actually filthy. I'm still not sure about Angela Carter's more extravagant theories of pantomime but it was great fun. Well, except for the songs, which were mostly bobbins. stephens described them as "sub Pop Idol" which was fair, and also gave us the idea for hot new talent show Sub Pop Idol.
I'd been sold on attending simply to see Serena as Widow Twankey, but we also got Maureen Lipman as Dim Sum ("37 years in the business and it's come to this"), the wee fresh-faced lad from The Crow Road as Aladdin, 'Allo 'Allo's Sam Kelly as the Emperor, and some bloke called Roger Allam of whom I've never heard as Abanazar. Whom, incidentally, I could barely bring myself to boo since his desire to take over the world seemed so sensible.
Also - panto when you're losing your voice? Bad idea, kids.


I know a mixed-race gay who wore a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party. This is a non-issue. Should anyone who wears a Viking costume apologise to Anglo-Saxons? Should anyone who wears a cat costume apologise to mice? Should William, who apparently went as a lion, apologise to survivors of lion attacks? It is a fancy dress party. If he'd worn it on a state occasion, then yes, that would have been inappropriate. Though still fairly funny.

Meanwhile, as Harry is pilloried for dressing up, the Burglar's Charter is renewed.

Irrelevantly to any of which, Oxford is to take a scientific approach to martyrdom. "Oxford University scientists will carry out experiments on hundreds of people in a bid to understand how the brain works during states of consciousness.
One aspect of the two-year study will involve followers of both religious and secular beliefs being burnt to see if they can handle more pain than others.
Some volunteers will be shown religious symbols such as crucifixes and images of the Virgin Mary during the tests."
Latimer & Ridley, thou shouldst be living at this hour.

Comments

[j4.livejournal.com]

Have I offended a fetishist?

Dunno, mate! Speaking not as a fetishist, I was amused rather than offended by your attitude.

You tell me if it's okay to dress as the Pope.

Oh, if you insist: it's not okay, because I say so. I know nothing about the Pope, I'm not interested in the Pope, but I do know that it is absolutely unacceptable to dress as the Pope under any circumstances.

So now you know.

[barrysarll.livejournal.com]

I think it's unacceptable to dress as the current Pope because frankly, one person looking that bad is all the world needs at any given time.

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

Ah, I think I see what you've done there.
Me not being interested in something is not the same as me not knowing about it. From the age of 15 I modeled fetish clothing for all manner of magazines and fetish events across the country - both legal and illegal (the obscenity laws were more vigorously enforced in those days). I saw the fetish world in gruesome close up for many years. I have no interest in it. But I do have an informed opinion of it. Though I suspect you don't actually care.

[j4.livejournal.com]

You yourself admitted somewhere up there that you had no knowledge of the potential therapeutic/cathartic aspect of true fetishism; you didn't even seem to be aware of its existence, as I suspect you would have been if you'd been involved with the fetish scene on anything more than a shallow surface level. Claiming that you know all about fetishism because you've modelled "fetish clothing" is like claiming that you're an expert on Catholic theology because you dress as a nun for sing-a-long Sound of Music.

You're right, though, I don't actually care.

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

If you don't care then why not mind your own business? Fucking weirdo.

[j4.livejournal.com]

Sometimes I find it fun to wind up neurotic teenagers on LiveJournal. So sue me.

(Though I think being called "fucking weirdo" by a self-confessed underage illegal porn model is a new record for me!)

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

Perhaps you might want to refine your hobby so you don't just fail to understand what a thirty three year old man is discussing intelligently with his friend on the internet so you don't make a complete and utter fool of yourself by missing the point entirely and admitting to being one of those bizarre creatures who lurks on the net trying to score smug points over people they don't know anything about. You can't even use the facts in front of you! There is no age limit for modelling fetish clothing. Neither was any of it porn. Now who is the one who knows nothing of which they speak? Is this really something you're proud of doing? You seem to be. This scattershot aggresive approach to human interaction via the internet that has proved nothing but your own failure to grasp basic concepts of debate? It is, you have to admit, not a very dignified way to live one's life.

[j4.livejournal.com]

You were the one who described your modelling career as "illegal" -- apologies if I conflated that with the fact that you proudly told us you were only 15 at the time. However, you're doing exactly the same thing when you assume that because I'm not entirely au fait with the laws pertaining to child models, I know nothing about fetishism. (I'm afraid I don't have a fetish CV to wave at you; but I read, and I talk to people, and I learn from what they have to say rather than just yelling "I'm not interested" every time somebody tries to share an opinion with me.)

You also seem very sure that you know what I'm like despite the fact that you've never met me and never interacted with me before this conversation -- which I started with a wryly amused comment and you blew out of all proportion. To be honest I'm finding the whole thing more funny than offensive -- it's certainly rather ironically amusing that in the same breath you can criticise me for making assumptions about you and then make a whole different set of assumptions about me.

But I'm not trying to score points over anybody; and no, I'm not proud of getting into accidental flamewars with idiots. Are you proud of what you're doing to continue this argument? Do you feel dignified about the way you're overreacting? Perhaps since you're all grown-up now, you could set us young 'uns an example and just let it lie.

Of course, if you're just having too much fun to stop, then what say we take the catfight somewhere else? (Your journal or mine?) barrysarll is probably tired of reading this subthread by now.

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

No, I don't want to go to your journal and don't want you on mine. I'm not having a "catfight" or a "flame war". Obviously if someone accuses me of things I'm not then I'm going to put them straight. Why wouldn't I? I like to be understood. It's only natural.
So let's break this last reply of yours down.
You were the one who described your modelling career as "illegal"

No I did not. I said that some of the shows we visited were illegal. Our fashion show was not since it only consisted of PVC jeans and jackets and the like that can be purchased nowadays in Topshop (but in those days were only on sale in the fetish shops). Nothing obscene and I had full written permission from my parents. The illegal shows were closed by police - which is how we knew they were illegal. I could've explained that to you if you'd asked - but you preferred to assume you knew best about a complete stranger.



I read, and I talk to people, and I learn from what they have to say

And how do you know I don't do this too? Do you have the monopoly on gaining knowledge in this way? Could you not have applied that attitude to this internet discussion?
rather than just yelling "I'm not interested" every time somebody tries to share an opinion with me.)
No one yelled anything. As I have continually tried to explain to you, the statement that I wasn't interested pertained directly to the debate about Nazi regalia. I wasn't interested in going down the fetish angle of the debate (since it's a whole other can of worms) since I wanted just to discuss the wearing of the symbol in other walks of life. I was the one sharing an opinion on it! I didn't yell at anyone about anything. You misunderstood my tone. Maybe that is the fault of my writing but you still keep hammering at the same point despite me telling you that you've got it wrong.

You also seem very sure that you know what I'm like

No again. I am only going on the information you gave me. You said "Sometimes I find it fun to wind up neurotic teenagers on LiveJournal. So sue me. " And my reply was entirely about that. That is all I know about you and it is all I was commenting on.


-- which I started with a wryly amused comment

I didn't see anyone else laughing. I now understand it was meant as "wryly amusing" but you have to understand that because it was based on you misunderstanding something I said then it made no sense to me. It didn't come over to me as amusing - just incorrect.

and you blew out of all proportion.
No, what I did was attempt to clarify my position. Am I not allowed to do that? Do I have to just sit here and let you make jokes about me based on misunderstandings? I didn't over-react, I replied.
To be honest I'm finding the whole thing more funny than offensive


Why should I care how you're finding it? The fact that you laugh doesn't make you right, does it?

-- it's certainly rather ironically amusing that in the same breath you can criticise me for making assumptions about you and then make a whole different set of assumptions about me.
Not ironic - intended. Shouldn't I give as good as I get? Though as I've already explained, I made no assumptions. I merely commented on the information you gave me.

But I'm not trying to score points over anybody;
Then why not leave it? Why not say "I was just trying to make a joke. Sorry"? Would that hurt so much? You actually came back with a number of 'points'. You clearly wanted to prove me wrong about something despite not actually being sure what I was talking about (which could be my fault but could you not just have a nice conversation? Ask questions, or simply leave people alone to have their debate?)

and no, I'm not proud of getting into accidental flamewars with idiots.
You call me an idiot yet you know nothing about me. I stand by my claim that you're a fucking freak, in that case. Because what kind of person turns up on the net and speaks to strangers as you did? Oh yes, one who likes to "wind up neurotic teenagers on LiveJournal". Hmmm.

[j4.livejournal.com]

I'm going to have one more shot at explaining this.

You said something to the effect that the reason wearing Nazi costume was unacceptable was that the Nazis had caused enormous hurt to millions. I drew an analogy with the Pope -- as instantly-recognisable figurehead of the Catholic church, in whose name hurt has indisputably been done to millions -- but made my point (as I thought) lightly enough that it could have been safely ignored. I assumed that if you weren't interested, you'd have the sense to ignore it -- normally if people aren't interested in something they just don't get involved with it, rather than posting something about it and then refusing to engage with any further discussion except to say how uninterested they are.

barrysarll reacted to my comment in the spirit it was meant, with a joke about the Pope's dress sense. You went off on the defensive out of all proportion to anything I'd said, and ever since then have been resorting to obscenities and abuse (or is "Learn to read, you fucking moron" or "fucking freak" really the level of "debate" to which you want me to aspire?) in the same breath as claiming that I don't understand the rules of debate. Perhaps if you'd led by example there rather than resorting to inarticulate ranting, we could have had a debate. I'm inclined to doubt it though.

I admit I wasn't exactly trying very hard to have a reasoned debate after your first out-of-proportion response: why try to debate with people who are probably just trolling anyway? Your hilarious point about people who "lurk on the net" trying to score points was really what convinced me that you were taking the piss: it's a common trolling tactic, accusing the other guy of being a troll. I figured you'd get bored of the game first. But your capacity for inconsequential arguments has outlasted even mine; that's quite an achievement, and I salute you.

If you really were taking all this seriously, however, I can only pity you. If you'd just had the common sense to ignore something in which you claimed not to be interested, we wouldn't have had this argument. And if you'd responded to the original comment in a reasonable way, we might have actually had an exchange of opinions. But you've dragged this so far into the realms of tedious meta-argument that I don't think there's anything more to be salvaged from it.

Now I don't know how you spend your leisure time, but I can certainly think of more entertaining pastimes than continuing this childish nonsense. So if you want the last word, now's your chance, because this is my last word -- after this you can follow up as many times as you like, have all the last words you can eat.

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

I drew an analogy with the Pope -- as instantly-recognisable figurehead of the Catholic church, in whose name hurt has indisputably been done to millions -- but made my point (as I thought) lightly enough that it could have been safely ignored.

But I got that and asked you to continue. I engaged with that, politely. Why should I ignore a reply? That would be rude. I wanted you to take it further. You chose not to and instead start some strange attempt to discredit my views (that you didn't understand).

I assumed that if you weren't interested, you'd have the sense to ignore it -- normally if people aren't interested in something they just don't get involved with it, rather than posting something about it and then refusing to engage with any further discussion except to say how uninterested they are.

Aha! Now I think I see where the misunderstanding arose. I never once said I wasn't interested in what you had to say. This may be a problem with the way LJ structures its replies. I never once said anything like that about your comment. I was still involved in a discussion with Alex. I said that I thought you weren't interested in my opinions because of a perceived sarcasm in your first comment. And I was right. But I never once said I wasn't interested in what you were talking about - quite the opposite. I asked for your own views about dressing as the Pope.

barrysarll reacted to my comment in the spirit it was meant, with a joke about the Pope's dress sense. You went off on the defensive out of all proportion to anything I'd said, and ever since then have been resorting to obscenities and abuse (or is "Learn to read, you fucking moron" or "fucking freak" really the level of "debate" to which you want me to aspire?) in the same breath as claiming that I don't understand the rules of debate.

I like insults. I like swearing particularly when the person I'm replying to is ignoring everything I've said to win some strange game of their own invention (which involved ignoring the rules of debate!) Why should I continue to be civil? I could say anything, it makes no difference. You're not prepared to see that you misunderstood everything from the start and used that as a chance to wind someone up - which you claim is your hobby. Once you told me that then well . . . you're all those things and more.



it's a common trolling tactic, accusing the other guy of being a troll.
As is reversal. The old "I know you are so what am I?" playground retort. You admitted to being a troll! You admitted to enjoying winding people up on the internet. What other conclusion should I draw from that? That's the definition of an internet troll. You can't get out of it by turning it round.

I figured you'd get bored of the game first. But your capacity for inconsequential arguments has outlasted even mine; that's quite an achievement, and I salute you.

Either you want someone to engage with you or you don't. If you don't then don't make a comment in the middle of someone else's discussion. If you do - well then that's what's happening. What is this obsession of yours that it should end? Why should it? Most arguments are inconsequential. But I have the luxury of time to explore them and see no reason not to.

If you really were taking all this seriously, however, I can only pity you.

What's to pity? What a stupid attitude. Can you not understand that people are different? You choose not to take a discussion seriously, I do. I'm a serious person. That's not a problem for me.
If you'd just had the common sense to ignore something in which you claimed not to be interested,

Again with this! You've got it wrong for crying out loud! That comment was not about you! How many more times!?

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

And if you'd responded to the original comment in a reasonable way, we might have actually had an exchange of opinions.

But hang on, it was you who chose not to take the baton and not exchange opinions. Again, you adm,itted you were only making a joke and weren't interested in discussing it. You can't admit these things and then go back on them. You were the one blocking a discussion and trying to make fun of me despite not knowing me or what I was talking about. That, to me, is not reasonable and I treated you accordingly.



but I can certainly think of more entertaining pastimes than continuing this childish nonsense.
Clearly you can't. I like to spend some of my leisure time talking to friends on the internet - which is what I was doing till you butted in. If someone is bugging me, I'll tell them. If someone accuses me of something I'm not guilty of, I'll defend myself - be that on the internet or in life. I don't play games with people. I don't attempt to ridicule people I don't know. How is that childish? Not that it matters if it is. Doesn't bother me. I don't mind being childish.
So up yours you fucking moron weirdo troll (who can't read).

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

Are you proud of what you're doing to continue this argument?
I am neither proud or not proud. I am merely defending myself against this barage of unfounded and confused accusations. Is that not my right? Am I supposed to just let you say what you like? Is that the game?
Perhaps since you're all grown-up now,
I only mentioned my age because you had some confusion as to it. You seemed to think I was still a teenager so I put you right. It wasn't a boast. No one boasts about being 33.
and just let it lie.
So I have to let it lie so you can have the last word? Why should I? You didn't.

[j4.livejournal.com]

So I have to let it lie so you can have the last word? Why should I? You didn't.

Tee hee. Impasse, methinks.

Go on. You have the last word, now. Go on.

[barrysarll.livejournal.com]

"barrysarll is probably tired of reading this subthread by now."

You're underestimating quite how easily amused I am. ;)

[j4.livejournal.com]

*laugh*

Well, I'm glad you're not offended but I'm afraid you're going to have to make your own entertainment now, because I'm bo-o-ored of this game. Soz.

BTW, I am genuinely sorry if your friend was really as outraged as he sounded by my inability to take his "debate" seriously; but if I try to tell him that now, he a) won't believe me because he thinks I am teh internet freak0r, and b) will probably rip my head off. If the occasion arises, though, do give him a manly handshake* from me.

* I don't mean this in a filthy sense, either.

[barrysarll.livejournal.com]

Calling people on my friendslist "fucking weirdo" is somewhat superfluous, no?

[oneofthose.livejournal.com]

Doh!