Amis and Gays--5    

 

Topic:	'The Anus Dialogues'
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	jules jwells7908@aol.com
Date:	Sunday, July 08, 2001 11:51 PM

Re: Simon's statement: "Most people would still find toilet trading, rimming, fisting and felching contemptible acts but these are not publicised" that StephieP finds so effing funny, and I know Ii will be sorry i asked, but what is "toilet trading?" and "fleching?"

I'm familiar with the two other sexually-argot terms, and btw, doesn't "fisting" collapse the sphincter muscles in the perineal area? And who wants to go around without any control THERE?

Bringing this all back home to MAD, I understand the old man, Kingsley, had that trouble - not due to "fisting," of course - but to an irritable bowel condition or some such affliction - didn't Mart mention it in his *Experience? (-"The horror, the horror..." -"Colonel Kurtz"* *The Heart of Darkness/Joseph Conrad

Yours,
Jules
 

Topic:	Martinian moral sloth
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	Tod F babiesdead@hotmail.com
Date:	Monday, July 09, 2001 08:09 AM

On 7/5/2001 9:30:47 PM, bronteboy wrote:

In company with Brian, you are, it seems, considerably less troubled by his vicious bigotry towards Jews than my remarks on homosexuality.

You should be ashamed of yourself. Are we to assume that you would infer anti-semitism of everyone who failed to attack Bill J's ludicrous post? Some of us with a wide range of web experience know when it is best *not* to feed the trolls.

Why? If you think it's “empty headed” for someone to see heterosexuality as “ moral normality” (not my term) so be it. Did you take exception to  MA’s, sorry Samson Young’s, description of the vagina as the anus’s “ better neighbour” in London Fields? If not, why not? How dare Amis judge one orifice as better than another for sexual purposes.

Hmmm. It doesn't really matter how often, how loudly or how brazenly you insist on identifying Martin Amis with every thought expressed by every character in every novel. It's still going to make you look a trifle slow.

How dare he! The gall of him, the nerve, the contemptible homophobia of him. He better watch out, Tod F/Brian will “call him ” and he’ll suffer terribly as a consequence, just as I did.

I really hurt you, didn't I?

Brian

Topic:	SPEW
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	DuncanT dfthistle@aol.com
Date:	Monday, July 09, 2001 10:43 AM

Pent-up fag fluff makes a hearty spew!
‘Bilge’, you see, had slagged three jews,
But not our Mart, as homophobes,
The board took off on a posting roll.

It went on and on for link after link.
They really should’ve typed in pink.
For what stirs men, all professed ‘straight’
To linger round this filigreed gate,

Debating just how Martin feels
About those men so ‘light of heel’?
A topic ripe for ripping rants.
And Lobby? Just one caustic cant.

Vidal would say: “HA! It’s proof
That all are really closet poofs,
Shackled to their mid-class mores,
Posting, here, their only foray

Into a world they quietly crave,
Peopled only by those brave
Enough to wear pink slippers.
“Sir... I can help you with that zipper.”

I say: Gore Vidal is fulla shit,
To think all men are ripe for it.
Some guys, really, are quite straight,
Pounding away at their other-sex mates.

The reason for this long-ass thread,
About what some folks do in bed?
It's just a chance to wax academic,
To orate, debate, hone polemics.

Check the clotted, high-tone prose,
Verbose, encrusted, thick.. it shows
That obfuscating simple points,
Required they work those finger joints.

So what will next produce such spew?
“Holocausts & Hilarity - an Amis View” ?
or “Amis & Dentists - Bridging the Gap”
or maybe Lobby will post some crap.

In any case, we’ll all gather ‘round,
To read the posters as they pound
Some simple point to tiny bits.
I’ll see y’all then. I’m up for it.

 

Topic:	Martinian moral sloth
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	bronteboy sbrockwell@500cc.com
Date:	Wednesday, July 11, 2001 01:17 AM

What does cloth-eared mean dear Stephen? The only context in which I have previously seen it used is when Basil Fawlty calls, yelling apoplectically, Polly a cloth-eared bint - hence my deducing that you intended an insult.

By way of response to your last post :

"(500cc.com? No wonder you're so laudably butch.)" +
"You expect them from someone who, say, works for 500cc.com, but not from the finest English writer alive today."

I don't work for “ 500cc”, thats my ISP's handle. He came with the building, BTW. And our same-sexers wouldn't regard me as " butch". Why not accuse me of hating tennis on the grounds it is effeminate? Puh-lease, drop the childish jibes; they are too unimaginative and they resonate with verisimilitude only when idiots employ them.

"the Brockwell paranoia of having to keep quiet in case your boss is a poof (where did you get THAT from?), a nagging concern that your own boss has a problem with you ..."

I do not have a "boss" and haven't had one for a decade. But when I had homosexual bosses it was my observation that any underling who so much as looked sideways when such bosses discussed their lifestyles could kiss their career goodbye. Needless to say I had, or developed the nouse, to read the wind and kept my own counsel, insofar as it was necessary to do so. For, as previously posted, my attitudes to homosexuality were quite different in the past. More or less like yours ( that is accepting your rhetoric as a genuine reflection of your attitudes) ie, a fashionably modern, moral high ground crusader on behalf of our same-sexers. Incidentally, please don't keep trying to establish your credentials as a heterosexual - its completely unnecessary as I'd already discerned your indignation as being a loosely ideological/intellectual and vicarious one, entirely consistent with modern orthodoxy, rather than personal.

Let me assure you, dear Stephen, when one or more homosexuals in any organisation take note that a subordinate employee is ‘unsympathetic’ it isn't the latter's " paranoia" ( a time-honoured tactic, a generic term employed to attack anybody not pro-homosexualist, the close cousin of the "homophobe" pejorative gag/smear/ label etc - both terms attempt to shift the onus ) operating when they find their career thwarted. As long as you keep crusading on their behalf you’ll be fine - you may even profit from it. Unremarkably in context, J Edgar Hoover only promoted heterosexual men who were prepared to simultaneously pretend that his relationship with the Deputy Director, Clyde Tolson, was not what it was, but also not be overtly or stridently anti-or pro homosexual.

There were however, since you demand it with upper case incredulity, two instances, one at 19, one at 24, where I was compelled to leave a job because an explicit “ either or ” demand was put upon me by a homosexual boss. These experiences are quite common; just not talked about, especially by those who acquiesce. A one time friend of mine, who still has views just like yours - essential in his line of work - was threatened with and indeed failed a Ninth Grade subject by its homosexual teacher who demanded he put out. Perhaps like John Self, Stephen, homosexuals were never interested in you. So the widespread occurrence of such things, being outside your direct life experience, are denied any possible reality.

"Your post is mostly sophistry; for all your high-aiming talk of literature and history, you are simply a little disgusted by them."

Not so. Upon learning of aspects of the lifestyles of homosexuals decades ago I was, quite naturally, disgusted. Who wouldn't be? But ultimately who cares, really, what consenting adults do to eachother? They can felch and fist to their hearts' delight for all I care. No Stephen, my position is informed by concern at the growing homosexual political and cultural power that I have witnessed in my lifetime - which should have been obvious eg " hegemony/ veto power". At a personal level I am concerned for my extremely physically attractive sons growing up in a world where adult- child homosexual abuse is not only commonplace but rarely prosecuted. And if you propose to parrot the " homosexuality isn't pedophilia" line, don't bother: they are not mutually inclusive but they are seamless and overlapping to a degree that is never acknowledged. Go visit the "rent-boy" venues in your city and see for yourself how old the male prostitutes are. Find out what sort of lives these boys have led. Apart from the sexual attractiveness aspect, the key operational criteria; analogous to Keith Talent’s big lesson : pick on the young, the weak, the vulnerable, the ones who will be afraid to speak up or won't be believed if they do. And " sophistry" is the word people use to describe convincing arguments they don't approve of; usually because it may lead them to uncomfortable conclusions.

" In your universe a seventeen year old male can have sex with a woman but not with a man),"

Again with the " homosexuality and heterosexuality are equal" mindset, stock retort # 23 . They are not. End of story. BTW in my jurisdiction such a boy is liable to be charged with " carnal knowledge" and jailed.

" .. but only because you're worried that if you don't they'll turn into Himmler. Intelligent."

Do you dispute that any of the nine examples, throw Roy Cohn in for ten, were homosexuals? ( Were you even aware of it? They don’t get posted on the honour board of history’s homosexuals like Michelangelo.) Whose state of being informed their psychology and modus operandi? Oppress anybody with jail and/or psychiatric “ treatment ” and they’ll turn nasty. Especially if its as fundamental as their sexuality.

“ You seem to think that homosexuality is a matter of brief resistance, gleeful acceptance, then a happy and guilt-free lifetime divided between trumpeting your life choices and the privileges you are thus entitled to,”

I most certainly do not think that. Homosexuals are, on the whole, in my experience, particularly tormented beings ( Which is why I find Gore’s ostensible superiority and smug “ pan-sexualist” claims so risible? ) as my earlier posts made perfectly clear. You’ve gotten carried away with your own predictable hectoring rhetoric and lost track of what I posted.

“ So, to get round to Amis. I think he's pretty much in line with Brockwell on this.”

My original point. Don’t be disappointed in him, Stephen.His capacity to write well is, in part, an extension of his ability to think independently, apply intellectual rigour and observe the world as it is, unconstrained by fashionable shibboleths.

BTW will you permit your son in future years to be babysat by one of your homosexual friends or colleagues? When he’s 11 or 12? Its the acid test of trust. Homosexual men I have known well enough to ask about their early sex lives and expect a candid response from have all, I repeat all, have had their first sexual experience at the hands of a much older male (neighbour trusted by parents, cousin, Christian camp leader, schoolteacher etc) between the ages of 8 and 13. Maybe they were all inexorably, intrinsically homosexual anyway. Maybe they weren’t and this experience was formative. I don’t know and neither does anybody.

I put this acid test hypothetically to a brother of mine who shares, outwardly at least, your views. (His pre-adolescent daughters have a lesbian nanny, which we both agree is not problematic.) He contemplated then conceded that he wouldn’t; informing me for the first time, en passant, of the sexual molestation he experienced at 11 whilst on a school camp at the hands of a 19 year old volunteer “ assistant” . In his forties I’m the first person he’s ever told of this. Alarmed at waking to find someone masturbating him, he got up with his sleeping bag moved away and gave the molester a wide berth thereafter. If you think this is a rare occurence or the legitimate making of a “ pass” , so be it. 25 per cent of Americans think the moon landing was faked.

Topic:	Martinian moral sloth
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	StephenP
Date:	Thursday, July 12, 2001 02:43 PM

It's all a bit of a storm in a teacup, so let me confine myself to a couple of mild objections:

First, of course I would let my son be babysat by a homosexual. Would you let your daughter be babysat by a heterosexual?

Everything you object to in homosexual culture happens in the heterosexual world too. Cast a glimpse at your newsagent's top shelf to see the infantilist heterosexual instinct in full and public flow (why do you think they shave these women's pubic hair?).

Finally, because my view corresponds with a modern orthodoxy I am accused of having no mind of my own. That your view corresponds with a vast majority of ignorant and bigoted right-wing farts you see as admirable independence of thought. I have been the subject of mild homosexual molestation, and while I find the instigators damnable, I don't draw asinine conclusions about homosexuals in general, as you do because a boss of yours objected quite reasonably to your inability to hide your distaste at his sexuality.

ps I have been fighting off the attentions of good healthy homosexual men for a long while, and long may they make a beeline for this breeder.
 

Topic:	Martinian moral sloth
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	StephenP
Date:	Thursday, July 12, 2001 02:51 PM

Ooh yes: Amis. I agree that his independent mind is part of his brilliance. I also agree with Prof Diedrick (in Understanding Martin Amis) that his inability to extend imaginative sympathy towards women (and I think we may add homosexuals and possibly other races) constitute a serious and regrettable flaw in his writing. He's spoiling the ship for a ha'pennyworth of tar.

Cloth-eared, by the way and rather obviously, means lacking a feel for tone.
 

Topic:	Martinian moral sloth
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	bronteboy sbrockwell@500cc.com
Date:	Friday, July 13, 2001 02:15 AM

Convenient as it may be to maintaining the superficial integrity of your argument, you misstate me again:

" I don't draw asinine conclusions about
homosexuals in general, as you do
because a boss of yours objected
quite reasonably to your inability to
hide your distaste at his sexuality."

I never had a boss so object, for the various reasons already stated at length. I did however have as I stated have bosses who put the hard word on me: the second instance was put out for him or my temporary appointment will not be made permanent. Your claim that you welcome predatory homosexual attention to yourself is ludicrous, unless you have such low self esteem you need such attention to feel a sexually desirable person. Asinine?

" Everything you object to in
homosexual culture happens in the
heterosexual world too."

Complete rubbish, as you well know. Its the facile " equivalence" argument again and it doesn't cut any ice at all if you are prepared to apply the rhetoric back to the actual norms of human behaviour. It has the same internal balance as " aggression is found in men and women equally" - sounds nice but it isn't so. Males are inherently, hormonally, biologically more aggressive than females, in humans and mammals generally. If you are confining your point to the occurence of acts of pedophilia, people working in the criminal justice system will put the ratio of instances of homosexual pedophile crimes to heterosexual pedophile crimes at about nine to one. Given that homosexuals form a single digit percentage of the population ( and heterosexuals 90% plus) the statistical likelyhood of a random individual homosexual committing child sexual abuse over that of a random heterosexual is hugely imbalanced.

" First, of course I would let my son be
babysat by a [ male] homosexual."

More fool you. I trust for your son's sake you're misstating your position for rhetorical effect, or the mother of your son has better protective instincts. It would be illuminating to see what you actually do in ten years time. Maybe the dim memory of your own experience will sound a warning bell in your head and surmount your ideological superstructure. My money's on a babysitter that isn't a male homosexual. Ciao.