Re: David, Jesse, Carol, Kelly et al: On Racism and other things that suck. [Was Re: Question for fat haters

AJ Davenport

David Johansen

From:	AJ Davenport
Subject:	Re: David, Jesse, Carol, Kelly et al: On Racism and other things that suck. [Was Re: Question for fat haters
Date:	21 Jan 2005 14:51:03 -0800

Daedalus wrote:
> On 20 Jan 2005 14:23:24 -0800, "AJ Davenport" ,
> wrote:
>
> >
> >David wrote:
> >> On 19 Jan 2005 22:51:17 -0500, blb@panix.com (Bernadette Bosky)
> >wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article ,
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>"Even if I were particularly ually aroused at the time I
would
> >> >>readily pass up ten anxious and available Black women to try to
> >make
> >> >>it with one White Women. The disgusting animal like smell of
the
> >> >>Black women is a complete turnoff"
> >> >>
> >> >>Now tell me AJ if you see this as just of statement of personal
> >> >>choice.
> >> >>
> >> > I'd say the first sentence is a statement of personal choice,
and
> >> >the second is a racist comment that has no basis in fact. LV
didn't
> >say
> >> >anything like the second sentence, did she?
> >>
> >> Here is some more of LV's message: Read it all -- Espeically the
> >> second sentence.
> >>
> >> LV wrote - - - -
> >> >
> >> >"The lower half of 1 black man is worth 10 complete white men.
When
> >I
> >> >fuck I like MEN, not little sissyboys that have to talk from
behind
> >> >their mommy's skirt.
> >>
> >> end of qoute - - -
> >>
> >> In one message White men were called little siisyboys that hide
> >behind
> >> their mother's skirt (IOW, cowards and then impugns their manhood)
> >> while in the second message the writer expressed a distaste for
the
> >> odor of Black women.
> >>
> >> It is a far stretch to call one a matter of personal choice and
the
> >> other racist.
> >>
> >> I really don't understand why a few of you go to such great
lengths
> >to
> >> try to justify and excuse LVs lapses of good judgment.
> >>
> >> I will not try to discredit you as of LV has done to others
accusing
> >> them of being someone else's socket puppet
> >>
> >> David Johansen
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > As to how much personal choice is and isn't racist, that's a
> >> >complicated issue that also comes up with personal choice
regarding
> >fat
> >> > partners. Certainly, to say that *no one* could ever find X
> >type of
> >> >people desirable is a matter of prejudice (and pretty much
factually
> >
> >> >untrue for any value of X), while saying that one *personally*
> >doesn't
> >> >find X type of people attractive is one's free choice. It could
be
> >a
> >> >stupid choice based on stereotypes, though. That's where things
> >start to
> >> >get hazier. Still, "people from X group carbonate my hormones and
> >people
> >> >from Y group don't" is inarguable. as a fact about the person
> >speaking and
> >> >not about groups X and Y.
> >> >
> >> >Bernadette Bosky
> >
> >Since all three of you choose to say the same thing, I'm going to
cut
> >down on my posting and answer you all in one message.
> >
> >David, I'm pretty much in agreement with Bernadette in my view on
> >your comment about black women. That is, the first statement is a
non
> >judgmental statement of personal preference
>
> Bullshit. How is a statement judging "worth" non-judgmental, you
> apologetic moron?

Leave it to a tunnel vision reader like you to focus on one word as
justification of your biased view. The implicit worth is to LV and LV
alone. Just as David's first sentence though saying nothing about
worth is a statement of his personal preference.

> >and the second is racist
> >drivel. You ascribe a certain trait [smell] will all black women
with
> >that statement and in a negative manner that is "disgusting" being
> >the judgmental red flag there. Ascribing a certain trait to "Black
> >women" is racist pure and simple, no more or less than the "wet dog
> >smell" comment that I've seen racists of color ascribe to white
> >people.
> >
> >As for Jape's obsession with LV, well if you have been around SSF-A
> >for a while you would see that I think that the two of them make a
> >lovely obsessive couple. Neither can let a day pass without
following
> >the other around slathering after them. I don't see the attraction
> >myself, but far be it from me to stand in the way of true love.
> >
> >LV is vulgar and that isn't my personal taste. But being a
proponent
> >of free speech I will make no effort to use her vulgarity as an
excuse
> >to censor her. Kelly's comment about cowcunts is just as vulgar
but
> >to each their own.
> >
> >With regard to LV comment about sissieboys there is no mention of
race
> >there so I am hard pressed to see it as a racist comment. See the
> >period between the first sentence and the second? That is a new
> >thought.
>
> It is not a new thought and you know it. She is expanding on her
first

That you can't read a period and understand that a new sentence is a
new thought is not my crisis.

> You are a coward and no fighter of racism.

You seem to have me confused with someone who gives a flying fig of
your opinion.

> > That is again LV's personal preference but I'm more
> >disheartened by the misandry inherent in that comment than the
> >erroneous perception of racism in the first sentence.
> >
> >As for pointing fingers, and patting yourself on the back for not
> >accusing people of sock puppetry, I don't think your behavior leaves
> >you any room to being calling others on that kind of thing.
> >AJ
> >Because, somebody has to be the Diva!
>
> AJ Davenport believes such statements as "White men are worth more
> than black men" not to be racist. It is just a matter of personal
> preference.

Nice revision of what LV actually said, jape.

SSDD

> She has been very clear on that.

What is very clear is your pathetic agenda and continual
misrepresentation of anybody's view you don't' agree with.

AKA: You can't teach an old dog new tricks
AJ
Because, somebody has to be the Diva!

From:	David Johansen
Subject:	Re: David, Jesse, Carol, Kelly et al: On Racism and other things that suck. [Was Re: Question for fat haters
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 19:45:46 -0800

On 21 Jan 2005 14:51:03 -0800, "AJ Davenport"
wrote:

>Daedalus wrote:
>> On 20 Jan 2005 14:23:24 -0800, "AJ Davenport" ,
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >David wrote:
>> >> On 19 Jan 2005 22:51:17 -0500, blb@panix.com (Bernadette Bosky)
>> >wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article ,
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>"Even if I were particularly ually aroused at the time I
>would
>> >> >>readily pass up ten anxious and available Black women to try to
>> >make
>> >> >>it with one White Women. The disgusting animal like smell of
>the
>> >> >>Black women is a complete turnoff"
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Now tell me AJ if you see this as just of statement of personal
>> >> >>choice.
>> >> >>
>> >> > I'd say the first sentence is a statement of personal choice,
>and
>> >> >the second is a racist comment that has no basis in fact. LV
>didn't
>> >say
>> >> >anything like the second sentence, did she?
>> >>
>> >> Here is some more of LV's message: Read it all -- Espeically the
>> >> second sentence.
>> >>
>> >> LV wrote - - - -
>> >> >
>> >> >"The lower half of 1 black man is worth 10 complete white men.
>When
>> >I
>> >> >fuck I like MEN, not little sissyboys that have to talk from
>behind
>> >> >their mommy's skirt.
>> >>
>> >> end of qoute - - -
>> >>
>> >> In one message White men were called little siisyboys that hide
>> >behind
>> >> their mother's skirt (IOW, cowards and then impugns their manhood)
>> >> while in the second message the writer expressed a distaste for
>the
>> >> odor of Black women.
>> >>
>> >> It is a far stretch to call one a matter of personal choice and
>the
>> >> other racist.
>> >>
>> >> I really don't understand why a few of you go to such great
>lengths
>> >to
>> >> try to justify and excuse LVs lapses of good judgment.
>> >>
>> >> I will not try to discredit you as of LV has done to others
>accusing
>> >> them of being someone else's socket puppet
>> >>
>> >> David Johansen
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > As to how much personal choice is and isn't racist, that's a
>> >> >complicated issue that also comes up with personal choice
>regarding
>> >fat
>> >> > partners. Certainly, to say that *no one* could ever find X
>> >type of
>> >> >people desirable is a matter of prejudice (and pretty much
>factually
>> >
>> >> >untrue for any value of X), while saying that one *personally*
>> >doesn't
>> >> >find X type of people attractive is one's free choice. It could
>be
>> >a
>> >> >stupid choice based on stereotypes, though. That's where things
>> >start to
>> >> >get hazier. Still, "people from X group carbonate my hormones and
>> >people
>> >> >from Y group don't" is inarguable. as a fact about the person
>> >speaking and
>> >> >not about groups X and Y.
>> >> >
>> >> >Bernadette Bosky
>> >
>> >Since all three of you choose to say the same thing, I'm going to
>cut
>> >down on my posting and answer you all in one message.
>> >
>> >David, I'm pretty much in agreement with Bernadette in my view on
>> >your comment about black women. That is, the first statement is a
>non
>> >judgmental statement of personal preference
>>
>> Bullshit. How is a statement judging "worth" non-judgmental, you
>> apologetic moron?
>
>Leave it to a tunnel vision reader like you to focus on one word as
>justification of your biased view. The implicit worth is to LV and LV
>alone. Just as David's first sentence though saying nothing about
>worth is a statement of his personal preference.
>
>> >and the second is racist
>> >drivel. You ascribe a certain trait [smell] will all black women
>with
>> >that statement and in a negative manner that is "disgusting" being
>> >the judgmental red flag there. Ascribing a certain trait to "Black
>> >women" is racist pure and simple, no more or less than the "wet dog
>> >smell" comment that I've seen racists of color ascribe to white
>> >people.
>> >
>> >As for Jape's obsession with LV, well if you have been around SSF-A
>> >for a while you would see that I think that the two of them make a
>> >lovely obsessive couple. Neither can let a day pass without
>following
>> >the other around slathering after them. I don't see the attraction
>> >myself, but far be it from me to stand in the way of true love.
>> >
>> >LV is vulgar and that isn't my personal taste. But being a
>proponent
>> >of free speech I will make no effort to use her vulgarity as an
>excuse
>> >to censor her. Kelly's comment about cowcunts is just as vulgar
>but
>> >to each their own.
>> >
>> >With regard to LV comment about sissieboys there is no mention of
>race
>> >there so I am hard pressed to see it as a racist comment. See the
>> >period between the first sentence and the second? That is a new
>> >thought.
>>
>> It is not a new thought and you know it. She is expanding on her
>first
>
>That you can't read a period and understand that a new sentence is a
>new thought is not my crisis.
>
>> You are a coward and no fighter of racism.
>
>You seem to have me confused with someone who gives a flying fig of
>your opinion.
>
>> > That is again LV's personal preference but I'm more
>> >disheartened by the misandry inherent in that comment than the
>> >erroneous perception of racism in the first sentence.
>> >
>> >As for pointing fingers, and patting yourself on the back for not
>> >accusing people of sock puppetry, I don't think your behavior leaves
>> >you any room to being calling others on that kind of thing.
>> >AJ
>> >Because, somebody has to be the Diva!
>>
>> AJ Davenport believes such statements as "White men are worth more
>> than black men" not to be racist. It is just a matter of personal
>> preference.
>
>Nice revision of what LV actually said, jape.
>
>SSDD
>
>> She has been very clear on that.
>
>What is very clear is your pathetic agenda and continual
>misrepresentation of anybody's view you don't' agree with.
>
>AKA: You can't teach an old dog new tricks
>AJ
>Because, somebody has to be the Diva!

I see you carefully edited out the part of my message regarding the
comment ref Black women and a White women stating that it was a
hypothetical comment to be compared and contrasted with LV's racist
message regarding White men and a Black man.

I cannot say for sure if you have tunnel vision, wearing blinders, a
careless reader or if it was an inadvertent omission. It was made
quite clear that it was hypothetical. See next quote.

>I find you interpretation of what constitutes a racist comment
>interesting. Please let me know if you find the following
>hypothetical comment racist or just a matter of personal choice.
>
>"Even if I were particularly ually aroused at the time I would
>readily pass up ten anxious and available Black women to try to make
>it with one White Women. The disgusting animal like smell of the
>Black women is a complete turnoff"
>
>Now tell me AJ if you see this as just of statement of personal
>choice.
>
>David Johansen

What is more clear to me though is that using a period in written
English does NOT signify a new subject matter. There could be more
credibility to that claim if she had put it in a new paragraph.

When providing your interpretation of the hypothetical comment did you
notice the period between the first and the second sentences. In you
mind does that period have the same impact as it did in LV's racist
posting?

I believe you are so obsessed with defending your turf that you will
say anything that suits your agenda.

As for all the hullabaloo regarding LV's clearly racist post, LV
could bring it to a halt if she would just openly apologize to all the
readers here and say it was a rash statement to put on the NG and she
is sorry and won't do it again.

Certainly, you must be aware that is the lightning rod that attracts
and generates a major portion of the negative comments here.
I truly believe that she enjoys creating turmoil. Isn't that the
reason that she is not welcome in the moderated version of ssfa?

David Johansen