HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » This message was self-del...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:01 PM

This message was self-deleted by its author

This message was self-deleted by its author (UTUSN) on Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:18 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

121 replies, 6736 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 121 replies Author Time Post
Reply This message was self-deleted by its author (Original post)
UTUSN Jan 2013 OP
sadbear Jan 2013 #1
UTUSN Jan 2013 #8
sadbear Jan 2013 #10
UTUSN Jan 2013 #18
rl6214 Jan 2013 #74
sadbear Jan 2013 #86
morningfog Jan 2013 #2
UTUSN Jan 2013 #6
Logical Jan 2013 #3
UTUSN Jan 2013 #17
flamin lib Jan 2013 #4
sadbear Jan 2013 #7
flamin lib Jan 2013 #12
sadbear Jan 2013 #16
Bake Jan 2013 #91
merrily Jan 2013 #62
merrily Jan 2013 #54
smirkymonkey Jan 2013 #81
Silent3 Jan 2013 #65
merrily Jan 2013 #5
UTUSN Jan 2013 #11
merrily Jan 2013 #19
UTUSN Jan 2013 #26
merrily Jan 2013 #31
UTUSN Jan 2013 #40
merrily Jan 2013 #57
Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #72
merrily Jan 2013 #73
Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #75
HooptieWagon Jan 2013 #108
UTUSN Jan 2013 #113
Eleanors38 Jan 2013 #114
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #101
UTUSN Jan 2013 #115
Lex Jan 2013 #9
UTUSN Jan 2013 #14
merrily Jan 2013 #21
UTUSN Jan 2013 #30
merrily Jan 2013 #35
MarianJack Jan 2013 #13
MotherPetrie Jan 2013 #15
pipoman Jan 2013 #20
merrily Jan 2013 #27
freshwest Jan 2013 #36
merrily Jan 2013 #46
freshwest Jan 2013 #53
merrily Jan 2013 #58
freshwest Jan 2013 #71
pipoman Jan 2013 #41
merrily Jan 2013 #48
2pooped2pop Jan 2013 #97
lunasun Jan 2013 #37
UTUSN Jan 2013 #43
Deep13 Jan 2013 #22
merrily Jan 2013 #28
pipoman Jan 2013 #47
merrily Jan 2013 #52
Deep13 Jan 2013 #112
sadbear Jan 2013 #32
Deep13 Jan 2013 #111
Godot51 Jan 2013 #23
Behind the Aegis Jan 2013 #24
UTUSN Jan 2013 #33
Behind the Aegis Jan 2013 #67
Science Geek Jan 2013 #42
UTUSN Jan 2013 #44
Science Geek Jan 2013 #49
UTUSN Jan 2013 #50
TheBlackAdder Jan 2013 #25
UTUSN Jan 2013 #45
merrily Jan 2013 #59
TheBlackAdder Jan 2013 #68
merrily Jan 2013 #69
TheBlackAdder Jan 2013 #70
UTUSN Jan 2013 #116
RKP5637 Jan 2013 #29
arcane1 Jan 2013 #34
freshwest Jan 2013 #39
merrily Jan 2013 #60
freshwest Jan 2013 #64
merrily Jan 2013 #66
smirkymonkey Jan 2013 #87
dawg Jan 2013 #106
iwillalwayswonderwhy Jan 2013 #38
NYC_SKP Jan 2013 #51
UTUSN Jan 2013 #117
In_The_Wind Jan 2013 #55
Science Geek Jan 2013 #56
EOTE Jan 2013 #83
madinmaryland Jan 2013 #61
Scootaloo Jan 2013 #63
napoleon_in_rags Jan 2013 #77
Pholus Jan 2013 #76
baldguy Jan 2013 #90
Pholus Jan 2013 #99
dawg Jan 2013 #105
Pholus Jan 2013 #110
diphthong Jan 2013 #78
catbyte Jan 2013 #79
EOTE Jan 2013 #84
smirkymonkey Jan 2013 #88
99Forever Jan 2013 #80
Orrex Jan 2013 #82
Th1onein Jan 2013 #85
galileoreloaded Jan 2013 #89
dawg Jan 2013 #92
baldguy Jan 2013 #93
dawg Jan 2013 #94
dawg Jan 2013 #95
LineLineLineLineReply .
baldguy Jan 2013 #98
dawg Jan 2013 #100
2pooped2pop Jan 2013 #96
another_liberal Jan 2013 #102
UTUSN Jan 2013 #118
WinkyDink Jan 2013 #103
another_liberal Jan 2013 #104
former9thward Jan 2013 #107
UTUSN Jan 2013 #119
bobduca Jan 2013 #109
UTUSN Jan 2013 #120
UTUSN Jan 2013 #121

Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:05 PM

1. Yeah, 'cause having a small package is just as bad as being a murderer.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:13 PM

8. I hope the sarcasm isn't aimed at me. Are there any studies about penis size and anything?

I would guess that dudes with HUGH parts might also be capable of gigantic ignorance.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #8)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:15 PM

10. No, you're right. We're wasting our time talking about penises.

We should just call them all potential murderers and be done with it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #10)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:24 PM

18. I could go with that. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #10)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 04:05 AM

74. And you are a potential rapist?

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rl6214 (Reply #74)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 09:34 AM

86. Yep...

I've known that since puberty. I've got no problem with it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:06 PM

2. What were they saying in the 70s?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to morningfog (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:09 PM

6. The movie in the o.p. was one of many references that depraved murderers or such were

repressed Gays, raging against (usually) women. There's something along those lines in HITCHCOCK's "Psycho." I don't have a list.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:07 PM

3. The small pennies posts make us look like GOP idiots! n-t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Logical (Reply #3)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:22 PM

17. Thank you. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:09 PM

4. Yeah, bit it's fun, the gun industry plays into it (consider your man card renewed) and in the long

term it will belittle the fetishists to the point that guns aren't cool.

Might take a decade but it worked with tobacco and alcohol.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #4)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:10 PM

7. Yeah, I used to like Corvettes, too.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #7)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:16 PM

12. I have it on good authority that cars and guns can't be compared. ;-) nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #12)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:21 PM

16. Corvettes don't kill people...

their small-penised owners do.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #16)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:00 AM

91. And you're being a very large dick.

Bake

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #12)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:48 AM

62. Then compare their respective owners.

BTW, any two things can be compared. Equated, no. Compared, yes.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:21 AM

54. I don't think the gun industry plays into it. I think the gun industry started it.

"Real men tote weapons" has been the message of gun enthusiasts for a long time.

I think it others pushed back against it by pointing out that real men are secure in their manhood with or without guns.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #54)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:45 AM

81. +1000

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to flamin lib (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:52 AM

65. And what about good, non-gun crazed men on the sidelines of conversations like this...

...who happen to have small penises, who might even feel insecure about that, but don't hoard guns or do any of the many other obnoxious things people associate with "compensation"?

Do you think that sneers about penis size are "fun" for them?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:09 PM

5. How is it just like saying gays are frustrated killers?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:15 PM

11. Uh, it's a rhetorical/propaganda technique of denigrating the opponent without factual argumentation

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #11)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:32 PM

19. IOW, like any insult that has not been proven?

Your reference to gays in the 70s seemed a lot more specific than that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #19)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:39 PM

26. Look, I cited a movie in the o.p., then another movie in another post, off the top of my head

and in my old age I remember a cultural, pop psych conventional wisdom "in the air" around the theme of repressed sexuality being the pop psych explanation for all kinds of horrendous things.

O.K., I've responded to each of your points. I don't have a pop culture history to give you.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #26)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:47 PM

31. The movie you cited in the OP had nothing to do with gays.

I am not asking for a pop culture history.

I asked you to explain your own OP.

So, far you have not done very well at that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #31)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:57 PM

40. You are playing a really old and well known game:

Flaming, characterized by:

* Replying provocatively to every post.

* Deliberately ignoring (in this case almost a dozen) replies specific to your posts.

* Thinking you will wear out whoever your target it, determined to have the last word.

* Launching personal attacks.


Have at it. Argue with and insult yourself. And you and you will certainly have the last word. Remember, you'll lose if you end with "HITLER!1"

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #40)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:24 AM

57. Your O.P was flame bait--and, by your own admission, you knew it when you posted it.

I and others have tried to get you to explain it. You couldn't do so successfully, so you started insulting others.

BTW, that rule about Hitler and message was a joke and some fools, usually RW, took it seriously, probably because they wished it were true.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 03:08 AM

72. I'm 64, and old enough to verify that anti-gay psycho-babble referenced by the OP.

I think many psychologists would have a field day with the penis-obsessed posts which flouish in DU.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #72)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 03:32 AM

73. I never questioned that gays were maligned in the 1970s.

After all, they still are maligned.

I simply asked the OP what connection he or she saw between claiming that gun nuts have small penises and the 1970s claim (prevalent or not) that gays were repressed killers. (Which, btw, has never been the prevalent image of gays, though it did figure into fiction. Males incested by their moms becoming serial killers of women also figures in fiction. That does not mean that is the prevalent social view of incest victims, either..)


I think many psychologists would have a field day with the penis-obsessed posts which flourish in DU.


One of the posters on this thread gave a fairly decent explanation of why one group of posters may refer to the small penises of gun nuts. (I am not in that group, but that is irrelevant.)

But the gun nuts also seem obsessed by the references.

(And, again, by gun nuts, I do not mean all gun owners.)


(Edit was to add the first sentence after the subject line, which I had somehow edited out of the post while drafting it.)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #73)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 04:52 AM

75. The OP was clear enough: One's contempt for another

very often devolves into a smear on the despised person's sexuality. And it is obvious that gun-controllers weild that bludgeon with particular glee and (unlike before in DU) impunity.

Like I've read in these threads, some controllers feel morally justified in throwing anything at fellow DUers. And penis is a popular weapon.

Another popular insult of gays during the post-war (II) years: They were drawn to fashion design so they could make a mockery of women. The OP, who I would no doubt disagree with on gun policy, broached a topic which needed "outing."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #75)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:44 PM

108. +1

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #75)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:57 PM

113. Thank you VERY much for your thoughtful/validating (of my point) posts, but regarding gun-nuttery

while I can only guess at what your gun policy position is -- gun CONTROL -- I assure you that there is NO disagreement from me. I did NOT intimate support of gun nuts in my scrawny O.P., ONLY the rhetorical immaturity side of our attacking wingnuts. (You said, "The OP, who I would no doubt disagree with on gun policy...") I can only assure you I am in your age group and I'm a WILSON-FDR-HST-LBJ variety of Dem. LOVE-ya, THANKS!1 Am going to self-lock the thread after a few selected replies.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #113)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:02 PM

114. You are welcome. I see the light, now!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #31)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:26 AM

101. You are in need of a pop culture lesson piror to you mounting the lecture podium.

The killer at the end of Looking For Mr Goodbar is 'sexually confused' in the terms of the time and is unable to get an erection, this was 70's code for 'fucked up gay guy kills again'.
So you are very, very wrong. Very. Along with 'Cruising' with Al Pacino this film was one of a string of such fucked up movies. Dressed To Kill did the same thing for cross dressers and or transsexual people...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #101)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:02 PM

115. THANK you VERY VERY much, AGAIN (notice how much and OFTEN I appreciate you

with maybe only once disagreeing with you?) THANKS!1

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:15 PM

9. So homophobia is like saying men have small penises

if they like guns? Umm, sure.



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lex (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:18 PM

14. I've explained as much as I can in the previous posts. I'm not going to go into tangents.

I never made a global statement about homophobia. I compared two specific rhetorical gimmicks.


I knew I was stepping into it, but I did and I'm done. Thanks.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #14)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:36 PM

21. If you knew you were stepping into it, you should have been prepared to explain.

Any comparison of gun nuts in general to gays in general is a pretty far reach, although I have no doubt some gays are also gun nuts.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #21)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:45 PM

30. Whoa, I thought I had tied the ribbon in your previous post. This will do it for me.

I posted off the cuff, off the top of my head. This is a chat board, not a scholarly dissertation forum. And, as for your expectation that I "should" be prepared or SHOULD do whatever it is you decide I SHOULD do, here's some more '70s history for you:

************QUOTE********

Gestalt prayer
(Fritz Perls, 1969)

I do my thing and you do your thing.
I am not in this world to live up to your expectations,
And you are not in this world to live up to mine.
You are you, and I am I,
and if by chance we find each other, it's beautiful.
If not, it can't be helped.


*************UNQUOTE********

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:50 PM

35. Oh, please. You made a nonsensical statement and, when asked to explain, you couldn't.

Your attempts to re-cast a request for an explanation as attempts to control you are ludicrous.

Poster up.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:18 PM

13. I make up for having a small package by...

...having a big ass...and I have a VERY BIG ass!

PEACE!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:20 PM

15. Except there was no truth to the latter

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:35 PM

20. Any real reform will require

help from gun owners. Snarking at them will only alienate..one of the only gender specific fictitious slurs tolerated in these parts..

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:41 PM

27. Gun owners and gun nuts are not the same thing.

As far as gender specific, give me a break.

No one said all males have small penises or even that all gun owner have small penises. Or even that all gun nuts are male.

Besides, even doctors used to explain certain female behaviors as "penis envy."

Supposedly, my gender never gets over being born with no penis at all, let alone a small penis.

I guess the ability to grow a human being inside one doesn't quite compensate for not being able to pee standing up without making a mess.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:50 PM

36. On that last paragraph. Oh, yes, it does. I saw a comedian doing a routine about his pregnant wife.

He'd come home after a day's work and when he saw her resting and thought she was being lazy.

He asked, 'Well, what did you do all day long, just lay around and do nothing?'

She answered, 'I made a lung.'

He said he was so blown-away he never got on her case again...

I thought that was pretty good.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #36)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:06 AM

46. The set up to the punchline is sexist, but that's another issue.

My post went to the studied, scholarly opinion of psychiatrists back in the day that women have penis envy.

Of course, that group also thought that a woman's wanting to have sex often was a disorder called nymphomania.

However, they saw no disorder in men wanting to have sex often.

I don't think any of them would be saying those things today.

Of course, almost all of them were men then.

My comment was limited to that profession in that era.

Comics today are a whole nuther thing.

One of them was on The Daily Show a few months ago complaining he got negative comments on his joking about rape.

Poor baby.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #46)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:18 AM

53. Yes, any expression of a woman wanting to be independent was called that. I had one suggest it,

since I was planning to move out of my family's home and control in the sixties. I said, 'Why would I want one of those? Eww!' with the appropriate look of disgust. He was embarrassed. We discussed it and I said Freud was obsessed. LOL!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #53)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:33 AM

58. Well, Freud was an equal opportunity fool

He attributed male behavior to lusting after their moms and/or a desire to return to her womb.

(Desire to return to the womb supposedly accounted for the desire of males to penetrate women.)

Why did anyone take him so seriously for so long?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #58)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:56 AM

71. There wasn't much competition for that field back then. He's been well debunked now.

Partly because women have been less restrained by the roles they were back in his day and both genders know each other better than they did then. We don't want to go back to being segregated to the old roles and occupations. There will still be a push for it, though.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #27)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:57 PM

41. Some around here use the two interchangably

and I don't know who's who..it alienates gun owners and probably has no effect on true nuts who happen to own guns.

The sexist nature of these comments? Oh, I see they're just in fun eh? So some sexually charged fun is permitted? Does that apply to any gender? Misogyny or misandry are birds of a feather..

I've not found a lot of men who can actually accomplish " pee(ing) standing up without making a mess."..

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #41)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:12 AM

48. I think it's only your perception that the two terms are being used

interchangeably.

When I post "gun nut," I mean gun nut, or I would post "gun owner."

I give other posts credit for making the same choice.

I never said the sexist nature of the comments was all in fun.

I simply pointed out that males are not the only gender accused of penis envy.

And, while you complain about message board posters doing it, I pointed out that psychiatrists did it to women,.

On a message board, you shouldn't expect every poster to be a rocket scientist, but people consulting psychiatrists thought they were getting "the truth" about the behavior of women.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #48)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:52 AM

97. Yes

I am a gun owner. I do not carry my gun anywhere. I'm not that afraid to go to the store.

I still don't want the gun nuts in my public areas with weapons of mass destruction.

And yes, I do believe it equates to his self perceived manhood, or toughness. Male or female.

By laughing at their penis size, we are not actually measuring it, we are going only by their behavior. Yes, if you are too afraid to be in public without a weapon like the guy at Penny's then you (not you yourself, of course) are a chicken shit. We should just say they ain't got no balls, but they are so upset by the small penis thing, that I will forever continue it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:50 PM

37. one of the only gender specific fictitious slurs tolerated in these parts..

yep
and reiterated in some posts right here

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunasun (Reply #37)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:01 AM

43. Thank you. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:37 PM

22. I'm well aware that part of the resistence to gun control...

...is that Americans' construction of masculinity often includes guns. It is pretty easy to make the jump from gun to phallic symbol. Pointing that out without any real idea of what to do about it does not solve the problem. In fact it is likely to cause true believers of the RTKBA to dig in their heels in the face of ridicule.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Deep13 (Reply #22)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:43 PM

28. Lack of masculinity and/or weakness has often been attributed to people who don't own guns.

Life is rough all over.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #28)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:10 AM

47. But would it be tolerated here?

I don't believe it would..

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pipoman (Reply #47)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:17 AM

52. Who cares what is tolerated here? It's a message board, for pity's sake.

Besides, it is not tolerated here.

People are objecting, aren't they? You for one.

That's what happens on a message board.

People say stuff. Other people challenge it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #28)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:57 PM

112. True. The now infamous Bushmaster ad...

...that presents a photo of an AR15 with the caption reading something like, "Your man card has been reissued" is an example. But isn't that just the other side of the coin. If masculinity is constructed to include gun-ownership, does the lack of guns from that perspective indicate a lack of masculinity?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Deep13 (Reply #22)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:48 PM

32. You make the assumption that true believers of the RTKBA

believe there is a problem (other than mental illness, movies, and video games.) When they refuse to participate in the problem solving, what's left to do other than ridicule them?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #32)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:54 PM

111. Well, there's that too.

I guess the people to win over are those who see some merit in each side of the issue.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:37 PM

23. Psychologically speaking...

... it is not the actual physical size of the genitalia of the person in question, it is the perceived size of said genitalia by the possessor.

So, it is humorous to equate the need to own an outsized vehicle, the need to own and carry guns and the need to compensate in other ways with the image of that owner needing confirmation that the organs he possesses are adequate.

Penis envy is a big issue, comparative penis sizes obsess many men; psychologists have to dig deeper to expose the truth...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:38 PM

24. "Looking for Mister Goodbar"? I think you meant "Cruising."

The former was not about gays, the latter was, and greatly offended many in our community at the time.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:49 PM

33. The murderer in Goodbar was portrayed as killing from repressed rage over his sexuality.

I'm sure IMDb will show it. ON EDIT: my words are reversed, should be "from rage over his REPRESSED sexuality."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #33)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:02 AM

67. The way I remember (and read) was it was because he thought she was mocking him.

It wasn't that he was really gay, but felt she was acting as if was. "Cruising", however, was all about the "psycho" nature of the gay community.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Behind the Aegis (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:59 PM

42. Looking for Mister Goodbar...

Was about a heterosexual, female school teacher who, on evenings, went out to bars looking for men with whom to have violent/pathological sex. Personally, I find the original post to be misinformed all the way around, many people TO THIS DAY, hold bigoted beliefs like those described in the original post, I could easily come up with 10 contemporary examples, in a few days I could find over 100. It didn't end in the 1970s. Hell, Justice Scalia has made such comparisons within the last year as have numerous religious leaders.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Science Geek (Reply #42)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:03 AM

44. The KILLER was a dude whose motivation was depicted to be rage over HIS repressed sexuality. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #44)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:12 AM

49. I read the novel years ago,

never saw the movie. I realize that the killer had an encounter with a man, but I am not entirely clear that the character was really gay at all. I've got the book up in my attic, I'll have to give it re-read and see what my present-day take is.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Science Geek (Reply #49)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:13 AM

50. Thanks for being civil about it. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:38 PM

25. Just Saying... Another way to say F.U.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #25)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:05 AM

45. True. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #25)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:38 AM

59. I don't see that way.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #59)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:11 AM

68. No... "Just Saying" is just like "Trust Me", it's another way to say F.U.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #68)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:21 AM

69. I don't see it that way.

FWIW, I don't see "Trust me" as saying F.U. either.

And I don't see "Trust me" as being the same as saying "Just saying."

I guess we just perceive both terms differently.

But, if you ever see me post, "Just sayin," please know I am not saying F. U.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #69)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:29 AM

70. Well, that's the way you come off to others.

You can 'see' it any way you want.

"Just Saying" has several connotations, and you've invoked the F.U. version.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheBlackAdder (Reply #70)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:06 PM

116. BREATHtaking riposte & shutting down of a flame!1 I am not worthy, I am not worthy!1 n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:43 PM

29. The wingnuts are the most unpatriotic in this country, net/net

the wingnuts are a bunch of domestic terrorists.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:50 PM

34. I see the small-penis thing as metaphor for what you said, "insecurity"

Actual, objective, tape-measured security is not the same as perceived self-security. Otherwise, how does one explain "truck nuts"?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #34)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:55 PM

39. An extremely poor sense of taste in accessorizing or a desperate need for attention...

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #39)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:42 AM

60. Could be a humorous way of saying he sees owning a big truck as an

expression of someone's need to see "I am well hung."

IOW, the guy in the photo may be saying about truck drivers what some DUers say about gun owners.

Then again, if it is his own truck, obviously that theory would be wrong.


Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #60)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:50 AM

64. Rather pathetic and useless. I wouldn't associate with someone who put that on their truck. But then

Romney/Ryan bumper stickers and white face Obama posters by the teabaggers and libertarians are also on my 'Eww, just get away from me, please' list, LOL.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #64)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:58 AM

66. Given how lame the photo is, I have to keep hoping he was trying to be funny.

I didn't realize that the Teabaggers try to insult Obama by claiming he's white. That's pretty ironic, considering the source.

Though only a few hours ago, a group of African Americans were discussing something similar on a local PBS program.

Disclaimer: I tuned in while the discussion was already in progress. However, it was spmething about gun control being a black issue and, while he is addressing the issue, he did not address it as a black issue, so he wasn't a black leader. I think it's fine that addresses it. And Gabbie Giffords isn't black. So, I wasn't totally following their point.

ETA: Besides, if he did label a black issue, would that help get anything passed or lead to sure defeat in the House? I think I'd rather have it addressed than labeled.

Sadly, I don't think passing anything really meaningful is going to be possible, no matter how it is labeled,

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #34)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 09:35 AM

87. That is just gross.

Is this something popular in certain parts of the country? I have never seen them here in New England.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to smirkymonkey (Reply #87)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:34 PM

106. Not common in Georgia, but not rare either.

I consider it self labeling. I always appreciate it when people give me easy to read signs that they should be avoided.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:51 PM

38. ok it's a deal, although I think your analogy is skewed

I won't ever say it. But I will ridicule tough guys who take their boombooms to Penneys.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:15 AM

51. Oh UTUSN! You're cracking me up!

I hope your "SOS" post in the lounge helps!

FWIW, I totally get what you're saying but your way of saying it is soooooooo.

Anyway, I got yer back if you need me!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #51)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:09 PM

117. Thanks!1 But my S.O.S. to pinboy3niner went cut-LOOSE!1 Maybe he deems me ableto handle it now!1 n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:21 AM

55. I agree with NYC_SKP

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:22 AM

56. I'd like to see a study, of male owners of multiple guns, say 50 or more guns...

Without a scientific study, nobody can say if gun fetishism is compensating for for smaller than average male genitalia, or not.

However, my suspicion is that anyone who is not a hunter, or who's profession does not require it, who owns more than 50 guns, is compensating for some kind of serious insecurity. Gun makers always promise that their product provides security, but that is false since gun owners are about 4.5 times more likely to die by a gun than non owners, that's not security.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Science Geek (Reply #56)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 08:46 AM

83. 50?!? How about 2?

No one needs one gun, I think the great bulk of the ones who own multiple guns are definitely compensating for something.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:43 AM

61. NO. Gun nutters/teabaggers should have be Shermanized back in the 1860's. Fuck them. NO...

Shermanize them.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:49 AM

63. It's shorthand...

for "Insecure wannabe macho douchebag who just wants to have something big to swing around so he can feel respected."

"Small dick" fits in the mouth bet... uh... Rolls off the...

You know what? "Small dick" is shorter... oh goddammit.

You know what I'm saying.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #63)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 05:07 AM

77. Ha! ROTFL! nt

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 05:07 AM

76. Gun advertisers disagree with your premise.

It's about "being a man."

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #76)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 09:50 AM

90. +1000. A very large part of "gun culture" is compensation for feelings of masculine inadequacy.

Which in turn feeds radical conservative ideology.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #90)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:21 AM

99. Which sadly is effectively and insultingly summarized by the slang...

The terminology is negative and creates a division that keeps an effective debate from occurring but to be honest that debate wasn't going to happen due to the implicit challenge masculinity which is involved.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pholus (Reply #76)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:31 PM

105. Bushmaster equates guns with manliness.

But it is us, the gun control advocates, who are equating manliness with penis size. Both are wrong.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #105)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:51 PM

110. Bushmaster sells guns.

If the imagery was thought to be successful in moving the product (as it was for more than two years), I am hard pressed to see how one can somehow conclude that they are not tapping into the underlying psychology of their market.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 06:25 AM

78. I agree! It's a pretty flaccid argument at best....

 

n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:13 AM

79. How do you explain Bushmaster's ad campaign? Just sayin'.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catbyte (Reply #79)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 08:49 AM

84. Ding ding!

Gun nuts HATE these comments tying gun ownership to their own inadequacies, yet it's the gun MAKERS who know that they need to appeal to the gun owners' perceived inadequacies. The way guns are advertised makes it abundantly clear who they're trying to appeal to. Extremely insecure men.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #84)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 09:38 AM

88. Thank YOU!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 07:35 AM

80. Possibly the poorest...

... false equivalency I've ever seen posted.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 08:01 AM

82. Gun owners love to cock their long, hard, well-oiled weapons

Wait.

What? What?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 09:07 AM

85. I don't get your analogy.

Do you doubt that these guys are overcompensating for some shortfall?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 09:43 AM

89. While absolutely correct, this isn't the right forum sadly.

 

In fact, to open up a real dialogue on why certain segments of the population (represented here) feel the need to resort to shaming in defense of their feelings about an issue would be quickly locked.

I will say though, that it is very predictable human behavior (absent rational arguments that an individual reverts to shaming subtexts) in most, generally it is a realm for those with stunted emotional growth or children.

Sadly, deriving and pointing out the logical fallacy of a specific issue with people so wired, causes those with the most narrow ranges of behavior available to them (shaming, personal attacks) to merely amplify and escalate making any real conversations unlikely.

In other words, any attempt in rational discourse has to be seen through the lens of a schoolyard disagreement. Oh well, thank goodness the adults are in charge of any real decision making.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:18 AM

92. Those posts are insulting to men who actually do have small penises.

To hell with the feelings of the "gun-nuts". Insult them all you want. But see that you don't also insult lots of good men in the process.

Particularly, I worry about younger men with small penises. In a recent discussion, I learned that the medical condition called "micropenis" affects 1 out of every 200 men. That's a lot of men. How many young men read this discussion board do you guess? Lots more than 200 I would wager.

I worry that using one of someone's unchangeable characteristics as an "ultimate" insult might make some of the people who have that characteristic feel worthless and unlovable. What if your son is born with micropenis? Would you want him to grow up thinking he's less than a full-fledged man because of that?

We already have lots of silly "size matters" humor flooding our society. And porn is pervasive, and certainly sends our young men a false narrative about penis size. The fact that we are willing to resort to this kind of playground behavior, even on a liberal message board, is indicative of the fact that we "all" apparently have psychological issues relating to penis size - not just the gun nuts and/or the men who are actually have small penises.

What the "gun-nuts' are compensating for is their pants-shitting cowardice. Why can't we just ridicule them for that?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #92)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:25 AM

93. Insulting people with incontinence, now?

Please understand the difference between the actual physical abnormality of having a small penis, and those that are traumatized feelings of inadequacy who compensate by obtaining large weapons.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #93)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:31 AM

94. I do understand the difference. Apparently you do not.

Why do you feel the need to defend throwing men with small-penises under the bus in order to make a juvenile attack on gun-enthusiasts?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #93)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:33 AM

95. Also I didn't insult incontinent people.

Last edited Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:01 PM - Edit history (1)

Just those that shit-their pants from fear every time they hear a twig snap outside their house. In other words .... cowards.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #95)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:59 AM

98. .

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to baldguy (Reply #98)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:22 AM

100. You're the one missing the point.

These insults are hurtful. And not to the intended targets, but to other, unrelated men.

And you just don't care.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 10:34 AM

96. well, I do think they are much wimpier than they think they are.

So I guess instead of small penis, I should go with something about their balls being so tight to their ass with their assholes clinched tight? You know, like in the fear response.

I think there is proof of these things occurring when scared. I say if you have to shop with an assault rifle on your back, you are a scared piece of shit.

Not the poster personally but people who NEED to carry their guns in public places.

NO WIMPS ALLOWED AT MY STORES

On second thought, I think the small penis reference is just another way of saying, scared.(rather than an actual penile measurement) And since the baggers obviously have no understanding of bag words like teabagging for instance, I don't think they will understand the tight asshole, with balls sucked up to it thing. So I'm just gonna stick to small penis compensation. They can understand that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:36 AM

102. Touch a nerve?

We didn't touch a nerve there did we?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #102)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:12 PM

118. The gratuitousness of your post was the deciding factor in my shutting down the thread. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:37 AM

103. So, sometimes a gun is just a gun? Unlike "This is my rifle; THIS is my gun"?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #103)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 11:48 AM

104. "One is for fightin' . . ."

I guess, though, if you use them both just for "fun," it could get a little confusing?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:39 PM

107. You will never stop juvenile name calling on the internet. Never.

Some people's social development stopped at the sixth grade and the privacy of the internet is the only way to express themselves.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #107)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:13 PM

119. I know, which is why I'm shutting down the thread. Thanks for the good point. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 12:48 PM

109. Fixation is the key word here

and it also applies to this thread!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bobduca (Reply #109)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:14 PM

120. Whose fixation, mine?!1 n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:17 PM

121. Wasn't going to shut-down, but am doing so now. Whole O.P. is within this post.

I retired last night with the old sicky feeling of a flaming (21% of total posts), and this morning my first thought was to self-lock (while copying the O.P. into a closing post). I raced through the morning paper to get at it. But in opening the thread, it wasn’t that bad. Despite some usual nit-picking about my phrasing of my point, very much *enough* of my point was communicated well *enough* to *enough* Repliers, but then my hero STENDHAL was happy *enough* to be understood by THE HAPPY FEW. I tend to get a core corps who delight in mocking my communication skills, but it’s my fate. And perhaps my not finding the flaming so bad after all these years, perhaps I’ve grown a thicker skin, for which I’m indebted to DU flamers since real life didn’t do it for me, tender/vulnerable precious flower that I am. But on the rueful side, too bad that when I spend 45 minutes on an O.P. (not this one) -- well thought out, lucidly enunciated, and with ORIGINAL INSIGHT (not this one, so much) – 99 out of my 100 SINK LIKE STONES, while something like this one gets 1K+ attention paid to it. Only one of mine (attacking “Dr” Laura) got so much, although the responses to the “Dr” Laura attack were almost uniformly UNflaming and positive (not like this one).

ON SECOND THOUGHT, after finishing this summary (above and below) I see that the replies, including the ugly ones, keep coming, so I *am* going to self-lock, after posting some thank-yous and some not-so-thank-yous, will Copy the whole O.P. here so as not to distort: WHOLE O.P.:: Just saying: References to SMALLgenitalia/guns are like '70s saying Gays were frustrated killers
Cf., "Looking for Mister Goodbar." The gun fixation has enough rationale other than the genitalia yuks: e.g., wingnut ignorance, insecurity, their idol worship of what they think is "patriotism" or "what the Founders wanted" or whatever and whatever. Else. (END of re-posting of WHOLE O.P.)



I will respond here to some unfair allegations:

* I never attacked anybody. I did engage (with descriptions of behavior) somebody I am calling a flamer.

* When I said “I knew I was stepping into it” this does NOT mean I was flameBAITING. It means I knew that that aforementioned corps of over-reacting misunderstanders (whose membership changes; not a permanent membership), would irresistibly do their natural thing and their responses are what I characterize as flaming. It’s not a matter of BAITING, it’s a matter of knowing that a certain percentage will respond that way and my choosing not to be bullied out of tossing out my opinion just because a 21%-er will put on their performance.

* To my “Characteristics of a Flamer” (post #40) an addendum: Ceaselessly demanding Replies, under cover of the pseudo-“altruistic” motive of eliciting an “explanation,” but with NO amount of answers EVER being enough explanation/clarification for this SAINT, with the demanded criteria ever-CHANGING.

* As for the dreaded FREUD references, coupled with my supposed communication deficits: Sometimes a CURSORY opinion is really self-contained and just doesn’t require much, if any, elaboration. The over-thinking. Or to complete the dreaded FREUD parody: Sometimes a cursory, self-contained opinion is just a cursory, self-contained opinion.

* The repressed-sexuality/killer meme continued in movies as late as 1999 with “American Beauty,” where the killer is a married, ex-Marine/veteran. Or maybe it’s just something about Richard GERE movies, and by-the-bye neither of the GERE characters were the killers in the cited movies.


***********QUOTE**********

Quotes from IMDb:
Man in bar: Me, queer! Jesus, I'm a married man, I've got 2 kids and a very expensive mistress. I'm an animal.
Theresa: That's why you go to gay bars ?

Gary: In my neighbourhood if you didn't fight you were a fruit. In prison if you didn't fight you spread ass.
Gary: I'm a pitcher not a catcher, and don't you ever forget that.


Wiki: “With the new year approaching, Theresa resolves to leave her clubbing behind and take control of her life. Seeking one final hookup on New Year's Eve, Theresa picks up a man named Gary, who turns out to be a sexually confused war veteran. At Theresa's apartment, Gary finds himself unable to attain an erection. Misreading Theresa's frustration as her questioning his sexuality, Gary attacks her and begins beating and raping her. After Theresa screams "Do it!" Gary stabs her to death.”

Roger EBERT: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19770101/REVIEWS/701010309/1023 “The heroine of Judith Rossner's bestseller was looking. Theresa was turned on to a particular flavor of self-destructive sexual experience, one involving possible danger to herself, and she played a role in bringing about her own death.

”In Richard Brooks's film version, that masochistic impulse isn't considered as openly. He gives us a Theresa who drinks too much, sleeps around too much, and takes too many drugs -- but she seems more of a hedonist than a masochist. She's looking for a combination of good times, good sex, and a father figure, for psychological reasons the movie makes all too abundantly clear. But she isn't looking for danger, mistreatment, or death. ....

“Brooks hasn't improved the story by changing its focus, and he's distracted from the heart of the narrative by several unnecessary scenes. ....

“...Theresa is driven by a need to communicate on her own terms -- and that those terms require her to have an advantage. She's great in a classroom of deaf-mutes, and great, too, with the men she picks up -- men who are inarticulate because of insecurity, cultural short-changing, or too much booze.
She delights in working people over verbally -- in kidding them, mocking them, putting them down, playing games with them. On the physical level, though, she needs constant reassurance.

”This Theresa is a different woman from the Judith Rossner character... ....

“...Brooks abandons her point of view to show us a scene in which the guy is established as unbalanced and hostile. But she doesn't know that and gets killed because she doesn't. Her lack of knowledge is exactly the issue here: In the book, Theresa might have picked up the guy because she knew he'd be trouble. ....”

**************UNQUOTE***********

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink