caroljane

Shane, thank you. I have a brief update on K. He is doing OK his first two weeks. He has had no trouble and has made friends (I hope they are the right kind if such is to be found there). He has a full schedule of visitors up to June including his girlfriend and thinks he can apply for conjugal visits (????!!!???) He is a big guy, 6 foot 3 and solid, and his reason for being there is hardly likely to make him unpopular so I am not worried for his physical safety. he even says the food is not too bad. I just hope the real world of us his friends and family and his real self will stay dominant over his day-to-day environment.

I get frustrated from time to time, especially when dealing with a complicated and highly nuanced topic on OL, but I also know that Internet discussions have their own inherent liabilities and that I am not being singled out for misunderstandings. This happens to all of us, especially we frequent posters. At the last session of IHS summer seminars (at which I lectured for 16 years), the faculty would give their favorite tidbits of advice to students. I usually covered the topic of how to use books effectively, Ralph Raico (then a history professor at SUNY) discussed problems related to writing, etc, etc. Ralph used to give this very useful bit of advice to writers: Suppose you write what you think is a brilliant little piece, and you ask a friend for comments. After reading it, he says: "I don't understand this one paragraph at all. It doesn't make sense to me." Ralph maintained that if your paragraph doesn't make sense to someone, then it doesn't make sense. (We are assuming he read it carefully.) You should therefore thank your reader for his time and try to figure out how to improve the paragraph. What you don't want to do is give a mini-lecture in which you explain to your befuddled friend why the paragraph should have made sense to him. Didn't he notice this line or that? Can't he see how you took care of the problem in the penultimate sentence? And so on.... The general lesson I took from Ralph's advice, so far as Internet forums are concerned, was this: If, when writing posts on a given topic, I fail to communicate the point I wished to make with a number of people whose judgment I respect, or if a number of these people misinterpret my argument, then, in the final analysis, it doesn't really matter whose "fault" this is. I should figure out how to do a better job. Hence my recent attempts on this thread to clarify matters for readers who may have misunderstood what I was trying to say. Accurate communication is an essential skill for every writer, and it is a skill which I can always improve, no matter how long I have been writing professionally, and regardless of how good I am (or think I am). There are some variables here, obviously, for careless readers are as common as careless writers, but I have found Ralph's advice very useful, and I recommend it to others. Ghs George and Rich, So completely true and needs to be said from time to time.Not only for those who are focused on scholarship and exegesis. I usually write here in frivolous or comic vein and if readers don't get my tone or my meaning, then I know I am not writing well enough.

I hope you won't mind a short disquisition on fascinating old Me, as I started the topic and it is one of interest that is developing in interesting ways. Maybe to explain where I am coming from will add to it. I have spent my whole life in all male households, except for childhood and adolescence, at some and crucial times of which it was just my father and me due to my mother's illness. My first job out of university was in an all-male environment; being hetero I had boyfriends; husband, sons, grandson, male granddogs, you name it. It was always love them or leave them. In my case I chose to love them, but it was really no choice. My luck in life has led me to think that (most) men are so great that if they did not exist, we would have to invent God so that She would create them. Entering adult life in the 70s I set out on the usual search for Love and Work feeling that there was very little difference between men and women, except mysterious desirable differences. I now think that the differences are greater than I believed, for many reasons, but that the bridge between them is wider and stronger than I knew then. Having always wanted a brother I tend to adopt them, and to cherish them.Even when they don't call or write, you know who you are!. I was fortunate enough to never have been beautiful, which I believe too be a burden on all but the strongest women, but i was never so unattractive as to suffer scorn or rejection on physical grounds.This attitude was something of a handicap in relationships, as I only interacted with men on an intellectual level and however mad a crush I had on a guy, I never knew if he was attracted to me unless he actually jumped on top of me. I also had no gaydar. I still don't have those abilities, but at my age it doesn't matter. I was never much attracted to the Hemingway-Mailer masculist American stream of literature, although I read it dutifully. Its message seemed to be that women are mysterious alien creatures who exist to either enable and admire, or manipulate and denigrate men. A dichotomy with an excluded middle. I can see its attraction for Objectivist thinkers. I certainly do not deny that there are many women who "play" men for narcissistic reasons, but I do not see them as any different as men who "play" other men for the same reasons. Narcissists and con artists play with the tools at hand, and sexuality is a powerful tool. One thing I like about OL is that I can use the generic "he" and everyone understands I mean "he or she" without semantic fuss. I don't don't use it anywhere else, I pluralize or use passive voice, and "we" is not always appropriate. But I think it is here. I'll just end with a great quote from Tony. "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers"

I hope you won't mind a short disquisition on fascinating old Me, as I started the topic and it is one of interest that is developing in interesting ways. Maybe to explain where I am coming from will add to it. I have spent my whole life in all male households, except for childhood and adolescence, at some and crucial times of which it was just my father and me due to my mother's illness. My first job out of university was in an all-male environment; being hetero I had boyfriends; husband, sons, grandson, male granddogs, you name it. It was always love them or leave them. In my case I chose to love them, but it was really no choice. My luck in life has led me to think that (most) men are so great that if they did not exist, we would have to invent God so that She would create them. Entering adult life in the 70s I set out on the usual search for Love and Work feeling that there was very little difference between men and women, except mysterious desirable differences. I now think that the differences are greater than I believed, for many reasons, but that the bridge between them is wider and stronger than I knew then. Having always wanted a brother I tend to adopt them, and to cherish them.Even when they don't call or write, you know who you are!. I was fortunate enough to never have been beautiful, which I believe too be a burden on all but the strongest women, but i was never so unattractive as to suffer scorn or rejection on physical grounds.This attitude was something of a handicap in relationships, as I only interacted with men on an intellectual level and however mad a crush I had on a guy, I never knew if he was attracted to me unless he actually jumped on top of me. I also had no gaydar. I still don't have those abilities, but at my age it doesn't matter. I was never much attracted to the Hemingway-Mailer masculist American stream of literature, although I read it dutifully. Its message seemed to be that women are mysterious alien creatures who exist to either enable and admire, or manipulate and denigrate men. A dichotomy with an excluded middle. I can see its attraction for Objectivist thinkers. I certainly do not deny that there are many women who "play" men for narcissistic reasons, but I do not see them as any different as men who "play" other men for the same reasons. Narcissists and con artists play with the tools at hand, and sexuality is a powerful tool. On thing I like about OL is that I can use the generic "he" and everyone understands I mean "he or she" without semantic fuss. I don't don't use it anywhere else, I pluralize or use passive voice, and "we" is not always appropriate. But I think it is here. I'll just end with a great quote from Tony. "We few, we happy few, we band of brothers"

So did I, as you see. I must tell a story about the wonderful lawyer who defended him. Being a criminal lawyer most of her clients end up in jail or prison, and because of her excellence usually for less time than they could have. She spends a lot of her sparse spare time visiting the prisoners like the ones Michael was thinking of. She visits because no one else does. Probably she does not much like them and is relieved that they are locked up and unable to do further harm, but she visits. She has a 4-year old son. When he's playing cars, here's his play-by-play: "Weee! there goes the guy running away from the police!" "Wooo! Here come the cops to take him to jail!" "W00AH! Here comes my mom to get him out!"

"Nice one, Barack. You didn't tell us that was a baptismal pool at the bottom of these steps. No wonder you wouldn't let me get my hair done.You'll pay for this."

Ps whatever you think of O, isn't Malia getting to be a beautiful young lady

"Daddy, I thought you said we should never turn our backs on him".

Just walk away slowly and maybe he won't notice us. LOLOL this one has my vote for the prize already

Yes, the sex parts were really boring, though she's not a bad writer. Erica Yong writes with sweep and power, no question about it, and has the ability to create characters full of life. Ths is often subject in in literary fiction: women falling in love and marrying a man they conceive as their intellectual superior, and the problems arising from such a union. A great and poignant example is Dorothea Brooke, the heroine in Middlemarch who marries an elderly scholar (Edward Casaubon). Terrible, isn't it? I too hate reading about that. Athough I prefer realistic stories over fantasy and science fiction, certain things I prefer not to have described too realistically in a work of fiction. Oh, yes! Middlemarch is my absolute gold standard, I have read it four times, and Casaubon is a timeless cautionary figure for all scholars and writers. Dorothea's total disillusionment when she has to realize that the great, transformative work she wanted to dedicate herself to helping bring forth, was just a pile of lifeless pedantry, is sorrowful to read. The disillusionment of poor Cheryl with the character of her husband in AS is an echo of this. How wise and brilliant Mary Ann Evans was. At the opposite novelistic pole, this also irritates me hugely: "He ran through the swirling mist, chasing the dim figure, while behind him, he knew, a dark terrible shape came closer, ever closer... He awoke, his heart pounding, panting for breath." I am not interested in other people's dreamscapes unless I know them and am interested in their psychology and preoccupations. This lazy cliche way of introducing a story is no way to get me interested in the character. I'll usually read further to see what the character does when he wakes up, but if he has the same dream again, I'm outta there.

Carol, Of course there is. Visit him often, like once every week or two. Tell him you want to kick his ass for being so stupid and that he is better than that. Then ask him if he needs anything. And visit him often. If you love him, that will not be much of a sacrifice and you have no idea what good that will do. Tell him to do the education stuff while his is in. Everything he can. One word of caution. If you do this and he asks you to do anything wrong, like bring him stuff he is not supposed to have, tell him you want to kick his ass some more. He'll get mad, but that will pass. Ask him if he wants some instant noodles or cookies or something. That's bound to be better than prison food. And visit him often. I doubt anybody else will. Michael Thank you for the thoughtful and practical advice. I hope anyone else who may ever be in such a situation, will read this thread and take it. I have already urged him to take every course going and read everything he can (he already has a college degree but is not a big reader). Happily I will not be the only one to visit, in fact I have to wait in line. His parents, his girlfriend and friends are solidly with him until he is free. He will have so much to be free to do, if he can grow through the penitential time.

You've got the wrong year. "The Eastern World, it is exploding..." "Eve of Destruction", 1964

Never doubt the power of the Global Domination Conspiracy of the Sacred Igloo! Not that I ever heard of such a thing.

Phil’s observation is a good one: Men are much more likely to respond to insults with guns blazing. Women will just sigh at the obvious immaturity and move on. You want more women posting here, Michael? Stop allowing little boys to use OL as a means of compensating for their shortages. I didn't know that the "first wave" of Objectivists had so many women.That is really interesting. Guys, don't be so tough on yourselves. The behaviour of men did not drive women in huge numbers out of other areas like law, medicine, the military, the patriarchal churches, etc. It stiffened their spines and increased their numbers over those decades. It can't be credible as a reason for women abandoning a philosophy in which they believed. Let's think deeper.

Yes. Ted, this is hypocritcal. When I was new on this forum you spit in my face, and swore at me, and though it surprised me it certainly did not make me conclude that that the forum was a vicious snarkhole. It was an emotional debate and these things happen.

This topic is of interest to me because this is my 5thmonth on the internet and 3rd on this forum. Michael recently made an analogy of guest and host which perfectly accorded with my expectations when I joined, and still obtain. I have been variously asked, "Why are you here"? "If you're a socialist, why don't you provoke debates"? and so on, and my instinctive answer was, out of courtesy. I gained access to the site with minimal entry qualifications, MSK took me on good faith. Entering into his site property I met many people with interesting things to say, and have engaged in many conversations with them. I have had maximum enjoyment and education and been able to ask questions without hostility. I have been involved in a gunfight and a catfight, true, but they started it. I thought that internet interaction would be interesting, fast=paced conversation on impersonal issues. I soon learned that no issues are impersonal. And the discussions still take place in a house. I thought the "cyber-community" was just a media gloss, not so. This is Michael and Kat's place and we get to blab and bellow all over it. Let's just try to be intelligible about it. And wipe our feet on the way in. Carol Here for a good time, not for a hard time

sorry, too frivolous to say once let alone twice

Thanks for your concern, but I don't think the sparks even made it off the anvil on this one. Idle banter can be fun for a while, however. Ghs "Idle banter is the Meaning of Life, if you ask me" -Libby Gelman Waxner

Thank you, Michael. I noticed the duplication and didn't know what to do about it. Ted, you are drearily correct. My question was of course rhetorical, but there are so many answers and some of them, I know, are hopeful.

Hey Brant, this is the OL party. We never close.

My son's dear friend has just gone to prison. He and Andy have been best buds since Grade 10. Kieran is a big teddy bear of a guy. His watchword is loyalty. When Andy's adored dad died, when he and Andy were 17, Kieran was at his side throughout the funeral home and wake ordeals, and helped him get through. When Andy graduated triumphantly from high school at the belated age of 20, Kieran sat beside me and cheered him when he won an award. When they were 22, they went out clubbing with a group of friends. When they left the club, a gang of suburbanites, whose hobby was to come into the city and start fights, taunted and attacked them with fists and knives. Everybody was of course entirely drunk and savage. The police sirens were heard. Andy grabbed his girlfriend and ran for a cab. Kieran fought on. A guy tackled him , and Kieran stabbed at him, grazing his neck. The guy was a cop. He deserves to be in prison. To carry a knife, to willingly engage in potentially deadly combat, to stab where you could easily kill, to willingly get so drunk that you cannot know if you are stabbing an enemy or a policeman ...take your pick. In his crazed drunken mind he thought he was protecting his friends. His signoff to Andy was always, "I got your back". There is no moral to this story. I am still shocked, four years later, that the Kieran I knew was carrying a knife around, or that he became another person when he drank. There are ameliorations; things could be worse. He could have had a gun,instead of a knife, in which case his life would be over, literally or practically. He could have seriously injured the policeman, and received a longer sentence. He will get out of prison, before he is 30. He will have to stop drinking.He will have to learn so much.If he can learn what he needs to, and combine it with what he already is, he will have proved his loyalty to those of us who love him. I think about him all the time, and of course I cannot help but know that it could as easily have been my own son, even though he didn't have a knife that night, or ever. Why are the deepest, tenderest passions of these young men so intertwined with rage and mindlessness and blood?

Ah, a sizeist! There's no restriction on personal liberty at the Poutine & Souvlaki Hut, you know. The rational stomachs will do whatever they want. Anarchist, know thyself. It is not the 300 pound part that worries me. Is the Billy Bob/truck driver part. Ghs You're prejudiced against the transgendered? Outragedly, Wilhelmina Roberta

A room? Well there's the parlour of course... and rooms are always going vacant here in the Home, poor Grandpa McAloon isn't looking too well...I'd have to ask Matron. Xray, we are supposed to be in this together. Now you are trying to palm me off on George and hog Plutocratus Anonymous all to yourself. Are they turning you into an Objectivist or something? All aflutter, Carol I'm just hoping that you are not really a 300-pound trucker driver named Billy Bob who has a flair for language. Ghs Ghs Ah, a sizeist! There's no restriction on personal liberty at the Poutine & Souvlaki Hut, you know. The rational stomachs will do whatever they want. Anarchist, know thyself.

Daunce I assure you I'm doing this for purely altruistic reasons, I swear on my mislaid copy of The Virtue of Selfishness! ;) "Plutocratus Anynoymous" - cool name you gave the Yet Unfound One! Now that gave me quite a shock, Daunce! I just ran to the mirror because Leonard Zelig came to mind, remember that guy Woody Allen played in his film where Zelig morphs, chameoleon-like, into resembling the people he happens to be with? Could I have started to look like Dennis Harden, or George Smith or Ayn Rand (I've intensely studied many photos of her in the past two years, and some Zelig-like effect might have occurred, by mysterious osmosis!)? I can't see any signs yet, so everything still seems to be okay. I just realized though when looking in the mirror that it's time to 'fake reality' a little and color my hair again (I always tend to put that off too long). Ms. Xray: Are you sure it was not the picture of Ms. Dorian Gray you are turning into? Wow, what did you swear when you were mislaid on that copy of The Virtue of Selfishness? Is that some kind of German literature kink or fetish? Adam reverting to what Ms. Xray thinks is my "type" Adam, I am starting to worry about you! First you showed you had knowledge of the ultra-secret hockey stick sexual subculture, and now you play disingenuous about Rainer Maria Rilke? Which you could never have heard from me because even if X ever told me about it in sacred secrecy I would never, ever have told? I trusted you!!

double post