What if three gay men had beaten up one lesbian...
and she was the same color as the lesbians here?
Waddaya think would be happening now?
3 comments:
Anonymous
said...
My favourite item in this story is the civil rights attorney's defense of the women on grounds that they had merely meted out "knuckle justice" to the gay man sc. who show'd them serious disrespect by insufficient carefulness around them (apparently he wasn't careful enough to keep his knapsack clear of where one of the women was choosing to walk).
Perhaps if he had had the simple courtesy to abjectly apologize the instant he was accused of letting his knapsack brush against the woman, there would have been no objective necessity of knuckle justice tikkun to restore the cosmic honour of the persons he offended.
The civil rights attorney who offer'd this statement of restorative justice via knuckles is a white male, and, it seems, also an attorney pressing for gay male scout leaders. ...
The MSM's curious silences on certain race identities, religious identities etc, and the rankings of intrinsic guilt and value etc, have motivated us all to become exegetes of silence in these matters, eh?
50+ years of inclusion of women and subaltern males and yet karma is borne only by the white man. Thus he remains man as such. Any wrong done by women and subaltern males occurs only in their capacity as "dependent variables" (sociological lingo: for Marxists, religion, ideology, superstructure, politics, etc are factors in how stuff happens but only ultimately in dependence upon material economics; these things are "dependent variables." On the other hand, the means of production change but these changes determine all other changes; means of production is an independent variable. (Weber says religion is slightly an independent variable.)
Shifting from dialectical materialism, which has proved so embarrassing, to the things of race, sex and class, white men who commit sexism, racism, classism etc have no excuse: they are independent variables in evil. Since the Western system as such is all bad, the whole responsibility for the Western system as such falls to white males -- inherited into them even prior to birth.
Conversely, the good (resistance, protest, marching for interdependent renewal, etc) done by women and subaltern males is done by them as independent variables: they get all the credit. Which regrettably means that when white men do good, they do so as dependent variables (having learnt how to do good by the example of women and subaltern males), or possibly not as white males at all. (Lincoln is a white male in his belief in the cultural superiority of whites to blacks, but not a white male in his opposition to the extension of slavery).
Oh well, as St Paul said some years back, "By karma [sacramental cause-effect deeds or action or praxis] shall no man be saved."
Jesus: "Beware the leaven of the pharisees who march for social change and Occupy Temple Street and so forth. The point is to cleanse the Temple.«
The Black ghetto class is ruled by a barbarian honor/shame code. I was once trailed for three blocks by a Black man who asserted that I had stepped on his toe while getting off a bus...a standing room only commuter rush hour bus in San Francisco.
I remember reading that the bristling honour volatility of underclass blacks is OUR karmic fault, actually. That is, to the extent that it is real and not merely another stereotype, it results from blacks' enculturation in the Southern white honour sensitiveness. Plus perhaps as a very comprehensible way of recovering from the vast indignity of slavery and devaluational segregation.
If the honour touchiness is in any way good, as by preserving a sense of dignity (which in fact I doubt, cf "honour killings" in certain family systems today), then the favourable value goes to blacks. But the bad parts of any honour touchiness, e.g. blacks' violence against other blacks, accrue to Southern whites, that is to all whites, no matter how vehemently low-class whites may deny the pervasive reality of "white privilege."
... White men seem the only candidates for accepting the Shadow Self. Women and subaltern males will accept only the morally good Shadow Self, e.g. the brave, liberation-bringing nonconformist who does astonishing "critical thinking" vs the 1950s, Creationist Christian fundamentalists, gender stereotypes in movies etc. (That's like saying poverty, obedience and chastity constitute the rejected Shadow of Catholic sanctity.)
3 comments:
My favourite item in this story is the civil rights attorney's defense of the women on grounds that they had merely meted out "knuckle justice" to the gay man sc. who show'd them serious disrespect by insufficient carefulness around them (apparently he wasn't careful enough to keep his knapsack clear of where one of the women was choosing to walk).
Perhaps if he had had the simple courtesy to abjectly apologize the instant he was accused of letting his knapsack brush against the woman, there would have been no objective necessity of knuckle justice tikkun to restore the cosmic honour of the persons he offended.
The civil rights attorney who offer'd this statement of restorative justice via knuckles is a white male, and, it seems, also an attorney pressing for gay male scout leaders. ...
The MSM's curious silences on certain race identities, religious identities etc, and the rankings of intrinsic guilt and value etc, have motivated us all to become exegetes of silence in these matters, eh?
50+ years of inclusion of women and subaltern males and yet karma is borne only by the white man. Thus he remains man as such. Any wrong done by women and subaltern males occurs only in their capacity as "dependent variables" (sociological lingo: for Marxists, religion, ideology, superstructure, politics, etc are factors in how stuff happens but only ultimately in dependence upon material economics; these things are "dependent variables." On the other hand, the means of production change but these changes determine all other changes; means of production is an independent variable. (Weber says religion is slightly an independent variable.)
Shifting from dialectical materialism, which has proved so embarrassing, to the things of race, sex and class, white men who commit sexism, racism, classism etc have no excuse: they are independent variables in evil. Since the Western system as such is all bad, the whole responsibility for the Western system as such falls to white males -- inherited into them even prior to birth.
Conversely, the good (resistance, protest, marching for interdependent renewal, etc) done by women and subaltern males is done by them as independent variables: they get all the credit. Which regrettably means that when white men do good, they do so as dependent variables (having learnt how to do good by the example of women and subaltern males), or possibly not as white males at all. (Lincoln is a white male in his belief in the cultural superiority of whites to blacks, but not a white male in his opposition to the extension of slavery).
Oh well, as St Paul said some years back, "By karma [sacramental cause-effect deeds or action or praxis] shall no man be saved."
Jesus: "Beware the leaven of the pharisees who march for social change and Occupy Temple Street and so forth. The point is to cleanse the Temple.«
The Black ghetto class is ruled by a barbarian honor/shame code. I was once trailed for three blocks by a Black man who asserted that I had stepped on his toe while getting off a bus...a standing room only commuter rush hour bus in San Francisco.
I remember reading that the bristling honour volatility of underclass blacks is OUR karmic fault, actually. That is, to the extent that it is real and not merely another stereotype, it results from blacks' enculturation in the Southern white honour sensitiveness. Plus perhaps as a very comprehensible way of recovering from the vast indignity of slavery and devaluational segregation.
If the honour touchiness is in any way good, as by preserving a sense of dignity (which in fact I doubt, cf "honour killings" in certain family systems today), then the favourable value goes to blacks. But the bad parts of any honour touchiness, e.g. blacks' violence against other blacks, accrue to Southern whites, that is to all whites, no matter how vehemently low-class whites may deny the pervasive reality of "white privilege."
... White men seem the only candidates for accepting the Shadow Self. Women and subaltern males will accept only the morally good Shadow Self, e.g. the brave, liberation-bringing nonconformist who does astonishing "critical thinking" vs the 1950s, Creationist Christian fundamentalists, gender stereotypes in movies etc. (That's like saying poverty, obedience and chastity constitute the rejected Shadow of Catholic sanctity.)
Post a Comment