Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 10:55:01 EST From: what tink? Subject: [WRITERS] FILLER: Apologia, apologies and such... [Warning: probably contains some words and phrases that will not be appreciated. Also may provoke thinking, which is almost universally abhorred.] Allow me to step back a moment and reflect on a trend I see on the list which really worries me. This may be a bit boring for those who prefer to just engage in verbal exchanges, but I find it necessary to stop and reflect sometimes. First, let me apologize to Bob (also known as Sharon). I found your expression of the rhetoric of prejudice against female homosexuals objectionable, as indeed I find most expressions of prejudice and discrimination. I find it particularly irritating when the argument is presented as a fait accompli with my agreement tacitly assumed. However, knowing the complexity of the discussion that would almost inevitably ensue if I were to express that, I chose instead to point to the reductio ad absurdum which could easily result from your expression. Your response to that at least has the virtue of focusing on your own shortcomings. (Although I should note that if you really believe simply "getting it up" would ensure sexual bliss, you should consult any of the various guides to both social interaction--e.g., romance--and to improved sexual interaction. I can assure you that there is quite a bit more to both life and love than just imitating a dildo.) Second, I should probably offer an apology to the list. In attempting this short put-down of an attitude which I don't agree with (for indeed, that could very easily have been the result--Bob goes off in a huff, and I don't have to listen to that attitude any more), I followed a pattern which I have seen used fairly often recently--and don't think is terribly healthy for the list. Basically, we're pulling parts of the other person's posting out and responding with a one-line (or very short) taunt, barb, or other put-down of various shades. In some cases, we're obviously hoping that the other side will shut up and refuse the bait. In other cases, we seem to be hoping that the other side will respond with anger and upset, perhaps even with an attack. What's wrong with this approach? It is tempting. It's often much easier than the lengthy explanations or exchanges of a real dialogue. It certainly doesn't take much effort compared to writing a story or poem, although we shouldn't ignore the mental effort (and sometimes the writing polish) needed to come up with a telling bon mot or other short reply. But the basic problem is that these are not sustaining the dialogue, the neverending conversation of we with ourselves. Indeed, such barbs and taunts are intended to either cut off the dialogue (which in some ways leaves the instigator as the "winner"--or at least the only person left on the field of battle, if you accept that metaphor for what we are about here) or cause the other person to respond in a desired way--angry, off-center, out-of-control, in shock and without thought. Many of the martial arts will say that the person who responds that way has already lost, and in some senses they are correct. Please note that there are one-line or short responses which are perfectly delightful. Sometimes someone points out a humorous twist that is so perfect, other times someone provides the tiny step that tosses us into nirvana, and other times someone just has a good and helpful insight. I'm not saying that all short responses should be banned... But I am saying that we need to be aware of, and avoid, the simple taunt, barb, mockery, troll or baiting put-down that is intended to result in silence, anger, shock, upset...the ones that irritate rather than communicate. And when you see me doing it, please--remind me that it's not a good idea. I'm not sure how we can best help each other avoid falling into this trap--it's a very tempting one for writers. Any ideas? Thanks. tink ------- End of Forwarded Message