Amis and Gays--6

 

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.

Topic:	Martinian moral sloth
Conf:	Martin Amis Discussion Web
From:	StephenP
Date:	Friday, July 13, 2001 03:23 AM

Hmmm. I'd put StephenP down as a decisive points winner here. But let us desist and concentrate instead on the myriad things we share, which is, of course, why we're here. I think my first ever post was in reply to you, dear Simon, all those years ago, as we shared a sneer at that dreadful Winterton woman. As you so quaintly put it, 'ciao'.