"To keep the review thread clean..."

[lorencino]

Is homophobia accepted at Literotica

The poem Lesbians Just Don't Understand by Ramona Thompson is a classic example of bigotry (in this case homophobic) that generalizes one person's vicious abuse to include all lesbians. What criteria are the people who approve or reject submissions using? In my neck of the woods incitement to hatred is not protected by the constitutional right to free speech. I am amazed.

 

[WhiteWave48]

An attempt at satire?

*****

 

[champagne1982]

The poem Lesbians Just Don't Understand by Ramona Thompson is a classic example of bigotry (in this case homophobic) that generalizes one person's vicious abuse to include all lesbians. What criteria are the people who approve or reject submissions using? In my neck of the woods incitement to hatred is not protected by the constitutional right to free speech. I am amazed.

I'm guessing that Ramona Thompson intended it to be ironic and satirical, but as the poem covers a touchy subject where discrimination is an issue, it's difficult to equate lesbians with parents in the way that she draws the parallel in her introduction. The words of pop songs are often confronting, but in poetry the extended generalization about lesbians is hard to take. The poem is what we're reading, and the message is a challenge. These sentiments wouldn't pass in my neck of the woods either.

Did either of you or both report this poem? You can you know? Down at the bottom. Or you can PM the site managers, Laurel and Manu -- their forum id's. Please don't spit and fuss unless you've taken the other steps neccessary to voice your concerns to the appropriate people.

 

[lorencino]

Perhaps, if I may be so bold as to suggest:

Did either of you or both report this poem? You can you know? Down at the bottom. Or you can PM the site managers, Laurel and Manu -- their forum id's. Please don't spit and fuss unless you've taken the other steps neccessary to voice your concerns to the appropriate people.

Spit and fuss? Please don't?

I was merely asking what the approval process is all about. I am new here and so I am going to be asking a lot of questions about what is going on.

I don't quite understand where you get to dictate what I am allowed to say on this thread and I have no idea what criteria you are using to tell me what the prerequisites are that I have to satisfy before I'm allowed to "spit and fuss."

BTW, I did click on the report link and explain my objections to whomever it is that receives those things. I also expressed my concerns to the author in the comments section under the piece. I explaining why I thought it was wrong without being disrespectful to the author.

After doing both of the above I came here to this special ". . . and other chitchat" thread with the express purpose of finding out a little more about the standards at Literotica which will impact on whether I want to continue to be associated with this site.

Up until I read the piece that troubles me so, I was in awe of this site and the amazing opportunities it provides for the aspiring writer and even the non-writer who loves literature. I still feel that this site is one of the most pleasant surprises I have stumbled upon in years.

However, whether it sounds like spitting and fussing to you or not, I am predisposed to confronting bigoted statements wherever they arise, in whatever context they arise because bigotry has been and continues to be the cause of much human suffering and bloodshed and cannot be taken lightly in any form. Letting the milder statements go unchallenged paves the way for the excesses that inevitably follow. History is full of lessons about the serious consequences of bigotry.

I am grateful to the people in my life who have called me on it when I have slipped into bigoted assumptions and statements. Their calling me on it has empowered me to become a more considerate person. I am sure that I will make mistakes and say hurtful, insensitive things until the day I die, but in a social setting (i.e., with the help of others) I am able to constantly reflect on my behaviour and attitudes. It is right that we help each other to be kinder, gentler people in this often vicious world.

Now that was a nice indulgent fuss. (with the hope that no spit is flying around)

 

[lorencino]

Why it matters

I'm guessing that Ramona Thompson intended it to be ironic and satirical, but as the poem covers a touchy subject where discrimination is an issue, it's difficult to equate lesbians with parents in the way that she draws the parallel in her introduction. The words of pop songs are often confronting, but in poetry the extended generalization about lesbians is hard to take. The poem is what we're reading, and the message is a challenge. These sentiments wouldn't pass in my neck of the woods either.

Lesbians are discriminated against so I react to the author's statements in the same manner that I would react to "You know, Jews are all the same" or "You know, African Americans are all the same" or "You know, Abos are all the same."

I saw the habituation to bigotry that characterized racists in South Africa who had no idea that they were being racist. The normalization of bigotry removes the limits to the power of the strong over the weak. That is why I won't remain silent even if I'm trivialized with the "fanatic" label.

 

[lorencino]

On the other hand

Ok! This is fanatical and reducing political correctness to the completely absurd:

Santas warned 'ho ho ho' offensive to women


SYDNEY (AFP) - Santas in Australia's largest city have been told not to use Father Christmas's traditional "ho ho ho" greeting because it may be offensive to women, it was reported Thursday.

Sydney's Santa Clauses have instead been instructed to say "ha ha ha" instead, the Daily Telegraph reported.

One disgruntled Santa told the newspaper a recruitment firm warned him not to use "ho ho ho" because it could frighten children and was too close to "ho", a US slang term for prostitute.

"Gimme a break," said Julie Gale, who runs the campaign against sexualising children called Kids Free 2B Kids.

"We are talking about little kids who do not understand that "ho, ho, ho" has any other connotation and nor should they," she told the Telegraph.

"Leave Santa alone."

A local spokesman for the US-based Westaff recruitment firm said it was "misleading" to say the company had banned Santa's traditional greeting and it was being left up to the discretion of the individual Santa himself.

Source

 

[Angeline]

Ok! This is fanatical and reducing political correctness to the completely absurd:

Santas warned 'ho ho ho' offensive to women


SYDNEY (AFP) - Santas in Australia's largest city have been told not to use Father Christmas's traditional "ho ho ho" greeting because it may be offensive to women, it was reported Thursday.

Sydney's Santa Clauses have instead been instructed to say "ha ha ha" instead, the Daily Telegraph reported.

One disgruntled Santa told the newspaper a recruitment firm warned him not to use "ho ho ho" because it could frighten children and was too close to "ho", a US slang term for prostitute.

"Gimme a break," said Julie Gale, who runs the campaign against sexualising children called Kids Free 2B Kids.

"We are talking about little kids who do not understand that "ho, ho, ho" has any other connotation and nor should they," she told the Telegraph.

"Leave Santa alone."

A local spokesman for the US-based Westaff recruitment firm said it was "misleading" to say the company had banned Santa's traditional greeting and it was being left up to the discretion of the individual Santa himself.

Source

I agree. I read that in the news and just shook my head. Wouldn't bother me if Santa said it to me unless he was making rude gestures and kissy faces while he did.

 

[champagne1982]

Spit and fuss? Please don't?

I was merely asking what the approval process is all about. I am new here and so I am going to be asking a lot of questions about what is going on.

I don't quite understand where you get to dictate what I am allowed to say on this thread and I have no idea what criteria you are using to tell me what the prerequisites are that I have to satisfy before I'm allowed to "spit and fuss."

BTW, I did click on the report link and explain my objections to whomever it is that receives those things. I also expressed my concerns to the author in the comments section under the piece. I explaining why I thought it was wrong without being disrespectful to the author.

After doing both of the above I came here to this special ". . . and other chitchat" thread with the express purpose of finding out a little more about the standards at Literotica which will impact on whether I want to continue to be associated with this site.

Up until I read the piece that troubles me so, I was in awe of this site and the amazing opportunities it provides for the aspiring writer and even the non-writer who loves literature. I still feel that this site is one of the most pleasant surprises I have stumbled upon in years.

However, whether it sounds like spitting and fussing to you or not, I am predisposed to confronting bigoted statements wherever they arise, in whatever context they arise because bigotry has been and continues to be the cause of much human suffering and bloodshed and cannot be taken lightly in any form. Letting the milder statements go unchallenged paves the way for the excesses that inevitably follow. History is full of lessons about the serious consequences of bigotry.

I am grateful to the people in my life who have called me on it when I have slipped into bigoted assumptions and statements. Their calling me on it has empowered me to become a more considerate person. I am sure that I will make mistakes and say hurtful, insensitive things until the day I die, but in a social setting (i.e., with the help of others) I am able to constantly reflect on my behaviour and attitudes. It is right that we help each other to be kinder, gentler people in this often vicious world.

Now that was a nice indulgent fuss. (with the hope that no spit is flying around)

I've been around here long enough to know that publicly airing anyone's dirty laundry in a long and well-used thread only serves to stink up this place and stifle creativity, (witness this current kafluffle). Why don't you go and discuss the POLITICAL aspects of this poem on a lit bulletin board where the people who really would credit this discussion the respect and attention it deserves post? You can also start a new thread any time and then the folks who wish to read and discuss the subject could do so.

It's lovely that you feel you could ask other forum members about Literotica screening standards, but the point is moot since none of us, unless we are Laurel or Manu, can do shit all about it. Not to mention that the way your question was buried amidst your personal rant turned from a direct question into a rhetorical one, at least to me.

You claim the newbie mulligan quite frequently, that's fine, but you really should check out the site faq and info files that are found on the Literotica main and Story Index pages, before playing on on the back nine.

 

[Angeline]

Spit and fuss? Please don't?

I was merely asking what the approval process is all about. I am new here and so I am going to be asking a lot of questions about what is going on.

I don't quite understand where you get to dictate what I am allowed to say on this thread and I have no idea what criteria you are using to tell me what the prerequisites are that I have to satisfy before I'm allowed to "spit and fuss."

BTW, I did click on the report link and explain my objections to whomever it is that receives those things. I also expressed my concerns to the author in the comments section under the piece. I explaining why I thought it was wrong without being disrespectful to the author.

After doing both of the above I came here to this special ". . . and other chitchat" thread with the express purpose of finding out a little more about the standards at Literotica which will impact on whether I want to continue to be associated with this site.

Up until I read the piece that troubles me so, I was in awe of this site and the amazing opportunities it provides for the aspiring writer and even the non-writer who loves literature. I still feel that this site is one of the most pleasant surprises I have stumbled upon in years.

However, whether it sounds like spitting and fussing to you or not, I am predisposed to confronting bigoted statements wherever they arise, in whatever context they arise because bigotry has been and continues to be the cause of much human suffering and bloodshed and cannot be taken lightly in any form. Letting the milder statements go unchallenged paves the way for the excesses that inevitably follow. History is full of lessons about the serious consequences of bigotry.

I am grateful to the people in my life who have called me on it when I have slipped into bigoted assumptions and statements. Their calling me on it has empowered me to become a more considerate person. I am sure that I will make mistakes and say hurtful, insensitive things until the day I die, but in a social setting (i.e., with the help of others) I am able to constantly reflect on my behaviour and attitudes. It is right that we help each other to be kinder, gentler people in this often vicious world.

Now that was a nice indulgent fuss. (with the hope that no spit is flying around)

Unfortunately, Literotica is no different from any other miscroscosm of society. People here say all sorts of things under the banner of free speech that you or I (or anyone) might find objectionable. Others wouldn't. All you need to do is read some of the threads on the General Board, for example, to discover that every kind of "ism" you find elsewhere in the world is alive and well here. I think you've done the right thing in reporting material you found objectionable. Beyond that there's not much you can do. If the site owners, Laurel and Manu, choose to ban people who espouse objectionable opinions, they will. My experience is that they play pretty free and loose with attitudes here, Sometimes I find it offensive, too, but I consider it a mostly fair trade-off to be able to say what I want when I want. I've seen much, much worse here (in posts moreso than stories or poems) than the poem you referenced. I've reported posts, too, over the years but I know ultimately that the only things I can control here (or anywhere) are my own actions.

I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

 

[WhiteWave48]

This is a forum - is it?

*****

 

[jthserra]

The poem Lesbians Just Don't Understand by Ramona Thompson is a classic example of bigotry (in this case homophobic) that generalizes one person's vicious abuse to include all lesbians. What criteria are the people who approve or reject submissions using? In my neck of the woods incitement to hatred is not protected by the constitutional right to free speech. I am amazed.

I think here at Lit, as well as anywhere else the merit of the poem should be evaluated on the quality of the poem and not the content. What someone reads as homophobic or generalizations my be read as a sizzling indictment of it all by someone else. But whether the poet wants to express these views to laud them or make fun of them I don't feel I have any right to prevent her from presenting the viewpoint. I don't feel I have a right to rate or evaluate, much less censure the poem on the basis of the poet's viewpoint whether I agree or disagree with the viewpoint.

Now, as to the poety itself, I didn't find the poem very strong, it didn't stand on it's own. Without being familiar with the song the poem is a parody of, I really couldn't find a rhythm in the wording, it came across as somewhat disjointed phrases. Perhaps if it was set to music it might come across more strongly, but as a page poem it simply read too prosy for me. That said it is as good as probably 50 to 60% of the poetry here at Lit and therefore deserves to remain in the archives as poetry.

If anyone disagrees with the content of any poem anywhere, the perfect response is to write a poem expressing your viewpoint. Write the poem better than the original and people may take you serious enough to look into their heart and minds about their own personal views. I think that is the best response you can take, there are other ways to respond such as discussing it with the author, expressing your own views or simply ignoring the poem, but absolute worst response is to try block or remove the poem from public view.

 

[ramonathompson]

The normalization of bigotry was my objection in the first place. I'm sorry if this didn't come across in my original comment. I tried to be moderate in the way I expressed my views so that members would feel free to discuss them. I wish I had done a 'spit and fuss' now.

When I read the poem right through, I was appalled. I was also amazed at the work that had gone into the writing of such a lengthy piece, and wondered at the thinking behind it during the creative process. After I had looked up Ramona Thompson's extensive bio and list of works, I wondered if she intended something that I'd missed.

Ramona Thompson wrote a parody on a pop song originally about parents, replacing the 'parent' concept with 'lesbian'. The bigotry-laden 'lesbian' is no match for the universality of 'parent', so the parody fails - in fact it does more than fail, it does damage by becoming a long rant against lesbians much like that old song about 'short people' - the one that everyone sang without question.

Under the belief that this site was all 'free speech', I was unaware I should report this poem to Laurel. I also thought this thread was here to discuss all kinds of matters associated with writing poetry, including subject matter - surely a key issue. That anyone should suggest we move this discussion to another more general forum outside this one is a shameful attempt to deny poets the right to discuss what is appropriate in poetry writing and what is not, and in their own forum.

Like lorencino, I did sent a polite message to Ramona Thompson inviting her to discuss her poem here with other poets. I provided my contact details so she could reply. To give her a chance, I deliberately gave this writer an opening by modifying my response in the forum rather than comdemning her outright.

I do believe that choice of subject is a very important matter for discussion in a poetry forum. Some poems should not be written or circulated. Why? Why not? I'm willing to discuss this further.

I truely never meant to offend anyone with this poem/song. It was a storyline I came up with to showcase how one or two small incidents in someone's life can forever color and misinform their views of others.

Again I am sorry I offended anyone. Such was never my intend.

 

[WhiteWave48]

*****

 

[jthserra]

The purpose of the poetic language is to heighten the impact of the message. To me, any discussion of form and style is contingent upon the message it conveys.

If Osama bin Laden posts an excellent poem (a poem that heightens the impact of the message) here extolling the virtues of the events occuring on 9/11/2001, does his viewpoint extinguish the excellence of the poem?

If a KKK member writes an excellent poem supporting white supremecy, is the poem suddenly bad?

If a black man writes an excellent poem of his hatred (or love) for this KKK member is the poem good or bad?

If someone writes a terrible poem about the death of their father is the poem enhanced because we feel bad for the poet?


Whether I agree or disagree with the content of the poem has no bearing on the quality of the poem. If the language of the poem heightens the message, the experience, the emotion of it all, and it works as an excellent poem how can content affect the quality? Provided the content is handled equally well poetically the words extolling the virtues of a saint and the words extolling the sins of a sinner will still both be excellent poems.


jim : )

 

[unpredictablebijou]

Most excellent discussion going on in here. I thought I'd just weigh in with my take.

My thought is this: I despise bigotry just as much as the next guy. I'm downright bigoted about bigots. But I do think we have to be very careful about censorship, most particularly in a board like this. jthserra's questions above are excellent ones, and unfortunately there are no easy answers to them. Our emotional response to the idea of a poem is of course an integral part of our evaluation of the piece, and cannot possibly be completely separated.

But oh golly, even bigotry, even the most vile sentiments, do we dare take it upon ourselves to say that they should not be spoken? Speaking them makes them available for dialogue and teaching and ideally the response and correction of the community, while declaring them subversive and censoring them does not cure them but merely sends them underground.

And where does one draw the line? Discussions like this end up moving toward a question of legislation of thought and idea, and that is terribly dangerous.

Better, as is obviously demonstrated in this particular case, to leave the ideas up, talk about them, let them lead us to a better understanding of one another. Even in those unfortunate cases in which a writer is actually some sort of bigoted asshole, I believe it's better to allow the whole village address it with candor, as this village often does.

Of course, that's the opinion of a goddamned leftist commie fag-loving liberal weenie, so just keep that in mind. (grin)

bj

 

[champagne1982]

>snip< That anyone should suggest we move this discussion to another more general forum outside this one is a shameful attempt to deny poets the right to discuss what is appropriate in poetry writing and what is not, and in their own forum.</snip>

To insinuate that a list of options is shameful is not going to embarass me. I think that you should think about what you've done to my comments by suggesting that I'm less than within my rights as a member of this forum in my recommending the discussion find its own thread.

Shame on you for not saying this to ME in person, since I am the individual you're slapping here.

I edited this post to remove an unneccessary inflammatory challenge and to state again that this topic, regarding poetic subject matter, could have had a thread of its own. I may have been a little individualistic in saying that there were better forums, on the literotica site, to discuss the politics involved in the parody of a lyric poem.

You were welcome to disagree. You did. I don't understand the offense you took at my suggestion. You also had the option to give this topic its own thread. You were welcome to disagree. You did. Again, I don't understand why you would take offense to a suggestion.

You're welcome to disagree at any time. I don't get why anyone needs to push their politics in someone else's face but that may just be me. I wasn't asking you to remove it out of view from everyone, I just thought you could have offered some consideration towards people who really didn't want to get caught up in your strong feelings.

I am very empathetic, so the spit and fury you all show this passion is really distracting to me. I had hopes that you'd, perhaps, consider that what you see as important doesn't really rise above the radar of some other people who share this space with you.

 

[Tzara]

My gut reaction: People should be able to post (or "publish," if you think of Lit as publishing) anything they want to post, so long as it is not illegal (and, as ACLU member, I am kind of stumped as to what the hell might be illegal writing) and so long as it does not violate the posting rules of Lit. These rules seem pretty clear and simple: No sexual activity involving bestiality (you can write stories about supernatural beasts like ghosts, unicorns, werewolves, etc.) or underage persons will be considered. For the purposes of this site, the minimum legal age is 18. This site does not publish stories, articles, essays, or other material supporting, encouraging, or defending child abuse and/or exploitation. (from the Literotica Submission Guidelines page.)

I tried to read the poem in question. I didn't finish. Sorry, Ramona.

My main reaction was that it was boring, but then I don't know the song well enough to follow the rhythm. I think it is fairly obvious that it was meant to be funny. Look at the first line: A very dark parody of Will Smith's classic hit Parents Just Don't Understand. That don't sound like someone ranting on about the evils of homosexuality.

Anyway. You like the poem, you dislike the poem, to me doesn't matter. Have your say, wherever you want to drop the comment. This thread seems as good a place as any. Sometimes, I think our review thread is too focused on the positive. True reviews should sometimes slam people. True reviews are also sometimes wrong.

I support the right of any of you to say whatever you want to say about anybody's poems, be you Poet, Critic, Critic-Critic, or whatever. Mash all this out among yerselves.

Dialogue is what makes things work. What I think, anyway.

Not that I know anything.

 

[WhiteWave48]

Peace

*****

 

[lorencino]

You are a good person

I truely never meant to offend anyone with this poem/song. It was a storyline I came up with to showcase how one or two small incidents in someone's life can forever color and misinform their views of others.

Again I am sorry I offended anyone. Such was never my intend.

Ramona:

As the originator of this controversy over your parody, I regret the pain you have obviously felt as a consequence of my perceiving your intentions as the opposite of what you intended. It seems like it was a lot of work that just came out a little wrong and your intentions were not clear to me. I think it is very big of you to come here and deal with the problem so courageously.

I also think it was very generous and thoughtful of Whitewave 48 to alert you to what was going on.

 

[DeepAsleep]

Pointing fingers and name calling is the shiz-nit. I love flame posts.


~Ross
"Why is it that if a man grabs a woman's ass and she slaps him, then she's fighting for her rights, but if a gay man grabs your ass and you punch him out, then you're gay bashing?"
-Mr. Parker, "The Way Of The Gun"

 

[UnderYourSpell]

I think there are some that just like to stir the shit then sit back and watch everyone knocking each others lights out whilst back pedalling like mad.

 

[Tathagata]

I think there are some that just like to stir the shit then sit back and watch everyone knocking each others lights out whilst back pedalling like mad.

I'm shocked at that accusation, I'll have to watch more closely.





I've seen/ dealt with Ramona on the GB once in a while she's obviously forgotten to pay her brain bill.
I would simply ignore her.
You aren't dealing with a rational person

 

[anonamouse]

Not that I know anything.

DAMN,
had me fooled

 

[anonamouse]

If Osama bin Laden posts an excellent poem (a poem that heightens the impact of the message) here extolling the virtues of the events occuring on 9/11/2001, does his viewpoint extinguish the excellence of the poem?

If a KKK member writes an excellent poem supporting white supremecy, is the poem suddenly bad?

If a black man writes an excellent poem of his hatred (or love) for this KKK member is the poem good or bad?

If someone writes a terrible poem about the death of their father is the poem enhanced because we feel bad for the poet?


Whether I agree or disagree with the content of the poem has no bearing on the quality of the poem. If the language of the poem heightens the message, the experience, the emotion of it all, and it works as an excellent poem how can content affect the quality? Provided the content is handled equally well poetically the words extolling the virtues of a saint and the words extolling the sins of a sinner will still both be excellent poems.


jim : )

if ole Ez writes something about the jews...

Bad Example

really?
#1 it is tough to write good when you are not objective
#2 if you do pull it off, as regards to hatred, perhaps you should be shot. (not fatally of course, just winged)
Repeat after me:
Rwanda
poet, forgot if she was indicted
Bosnia
asshole folk singing wife, of murdering thug, forget their names.

This has nothing to do with RT's parady

Just me playing devil's advocate.
How are you doing Jim?

 

[Liar]

...and THAT is what is known as a buddy fuck circle.

Wassup? Out of coffee?

BTW jamison, minormonster (liar), how come I see so precious few comments from you two? after all the directive:
read, vote and comment, please. Those poems are waiting for you. They're lonely without you.

Laziness and severe procrastination combined with lack of time. If I say something about a poem it better be something substatial and not just verbal masturbation. Which is, critique wise, all I seem to be able to lately. I can post little "I read this" blurbs if it makes you happy.

Oh I get it, exempt because you did NPR once.

Don't be silly.