Silom 6 reviewed

[PeterUK]

Ah, thank you Smiles and piston10 for leaping to my defence, but quite unnecessary I assure you. Unlike one well-known ex-poster, I've never allowed homintern's barbs to get under my skin. Horror of horrors, I've actually grown rather fond of him. He can be a pompous old fool (not alone there), but then he can be disarmingly honest as well, as when he admitted the other day that he has few friends. Sometimes his humour is Christmas-cracker stuff but at other times genuinely funny, as in his recent account of crossing Silom Road at the new pedestrian crossing. He regularly protests his atheism, but in his constant returning to spiritual matters I sense someone genuinely troubled in that area. He's a complex, contradictory individual who brings a bit of interest outside the world of bars and barboys to this board. More power to his elbow. Oh, and thank you, hom, for the Christmas present of asp, in aspic - it was very tasty once I was able to stop it moving.

He regularly protests his atheism, but in his constant returning to spiritual matters I sense someone genuinely troubled in that area.

I suggest you review my home page, PeterUK, but I can assure you that my "troubles" are in the eye of the beholder. We've crossed swords before about your somewhat blinkered view that religion necessarily means belief in God. As for "few" friends ... I am constantly reminding ES and Smiles of the need for an Irony symbol - more useful I know as a signal for our American cousins, but it's clearly also (often) lost on fellow countrymen

[PeterUK]

I suggest you review my home page, PeterUK, [quote]

That won't happen, old chap. Life's too short for such frivolities. I do, however, apologise if I misrepresented you as having few friends. That famous irony of yours is positively subterranean at times.

That famous irony of yours is positively subterranean at times.

Yes, I'm afraid the next thing we know there'll be some damn fool out on Silom Rd, waiting to spot an old buffer with his zimmer frame so as to greet The Colonel - http://www.sawatdee-gay-thailand.com/fo ... php?t=6425

[piston10]

Well, that sorts a few things out, doesn't it?

Smiles and I jumped in because because there is no hint in the writing that describing PeterUK as a soft pornographer was ironic or a joke. It sits there on the page like an accusation, and neither of us were to know that it was, what shall I call it? - an 'interpersonal' irony between Peter and Homintern. Peter's finding the expression 'positively subterranean' to describe Homintern's irony is amusing, original and kind, but it sidesteps the real problem in reading Homintern's posts. In conversational irony we get our pointers from gestures, facial expression, tone of voice, etc., but in writing a reader usually needs a few hints in order to interpret the author's ironic intention properly. Again and again Homintern provides no indicators at all, and the result is we simply don't know how to take what he says. When we miss his ironies it's entirely his own fault.

I'm pleased to have the problem of 'denial' cleared up. I pondered Homintern's response to what I had written previously, but I could not decide what he was saying; and his attempt to make it clear did not help. I can now see that he was not recommending to me the path of denial, but saying that I was 'in denial' - a quite different matter. (I should, perhaps, have caught on, because the Thrope had accused me of this a while earlier. I can't say I understand, because here am I trying to make the most of life and take it for what it is - attempting not to deny anything!) I perhaps misunderstood 'Buddhism/denial' as Homintern put it to me because I tend to see Buddhism as a religious philosophy that is very good at setting up 'paths of self-denial' for us. Now I understand what he intended, however, I'm more than happy to withdraw the charge of hypocrisy that underlies the structure of my post.

As for his other 'accuracies':
The definition of 'catamite' he has dug up is only half the story about the word. The Oxford English Dictionary defines it, with Victorian primness, as 'a boy kept for unnatural purposes'. This should be 'a boy kept for buggery'. The word is a corruption of the name Ganymede, the ravishingly beautiful boy who was abducted by Zeus for... unnatural purposes. No one had ever contested the butchness of Zeus and 'catamite' has always referred to a passive homosexual - as I said. More importantly, the word has a history of use in English. Since the 16th century it has only been used in a derogatory and contemptuous way - with animus and disdain. It's about the nastiest word they could think of to clobber gay people with, and to resuscitate it and spit it out ('...ite' words are good for spitting out) at the beginning of the 21st century is wilful and self-indulgent.

I'm not sure whether Homintern introduces 'contrarian' into the debate as a description of his deliberate grumpiness, or whether it is supposed to apply to me. Once again, he just doesn't give us enough to go on.

Since I have had to backtrack on Homintern's use of 'denial, I'm not sure it is appropriate to make too much of TrickyRich's very thought-provoking post; but I'm sure that in a different context we would have much to say to each other. It is obviously written with feeling and I can see how it grew out of the material of this thread, which TR happens to have read at an important moment in his life. It places in stark juxtaposition the way of contemplation and self-denial and the dangers and possible pain of passionate involvement with life. To put it this way perhaps shows where my own sympathies lie. TR, I sincerely wish you a happy trip and a joyous outcome to what you so understandably approach with trepidation.[/b]

I'm not sure whether Homintern introduces 'contrarian' into the debate as a description of his deliberate grumpiness, or whether it is supposed to apply to me. Once again, he just doesn't give us enough to go on.

Let me help you there, piston10 - although I can see from your response you are remarkably obtuse. I have asked Elephantspike if I can have the term "Contrarian" used as a title rather than "Veteran Member" or whatever the standard nomenclature is to which I currently belong

As for "catamite" - I'll stick to the standard meaning, already used by me in my response, which has a venerable lineage. I'll also use other terms that you may equally regard as a gay "put-down", such as sodomite, queen, quean, poo-pusher, shirt-lifter, pillow-biter, faggot and of course pooftah. I have no intention of allowing the prim and proper among us to determine how I use the English language by citing its use by our enemies. We already have those among us (our own worst enemies, in my view) who perpetuate the belief that all gays are paedophiles by constantly referring to themselves or others in their late twenties or thirties as "boys". I'm happy to allow them their rich fantasy life (the Peter Pan complex has a long history in the gay community) provided they don't turn fascist when it comes to my use of the language :cry:

[piston10]

No, Homintern, as you are perfectly well aware, I am not remarkably obtuse. And you have proved my point. In a list of words you write 'Contrarian: One who takes a contrary view or action... unpopular at the time', and you expect us to work out that the reason you have included it is that you have contacted Elephantspike to have your title changed. As I said, you don't tell us enough about your intentions. However, I was not really surprised to discover that it referred to the stance you take. By the way, effective writing does not require buttons.

And I question whether the definition you give of 'catamite' is either standard or adequate. Words have a history of use as well as a dictionary meaning. I am far from politically correct and certainly not prim and proper, and you have, indeed, the right to use every contemptuous and vulgar insult that has ever been used against gay people. But if you do so, you'll just have to put up with people like me objecting. Which of that list of insults would you be happy to see applied to yourself? Most of them make their point by side-stepping viewpoint, opinion, argument, and even normal decency of feeling. Wouldn't it be better to leave that sort of thing to Bad Boy Billy?

Which of that list of insults would you be happy to see applied to yourself?

You've obviously missed the routine description I apply to myself - bald, fat old cunt. An insult only exists if you allow yourself to feel insulted. You are allowing others to define who you are and how you feel - another cause of suffering, according to The Buddha. As a top there are some in the list I wouldn't use against myself - pillow-biter, for example - but that is for factual reasons not spurious offence

The fact that you can't work out whether a term (in this case "contrarian") is being applied to you or to me is an indicator of your total obsession with yourself. Try some meditation on a couple of the Four Noble Truths to gain some perspective. It's not always about you!

[mikelele-old]

I love this thread. I quite honestly wish that I may meet you all sometime soon. =)

[piston10]

.. I was on the point of typing "Glad you're enjoying it", when it occurred to me that I might yet again become the victim of an unflagged irony. (I'm not very good on these colons and brackets, I'm afraid - I only recently discovered that LOL did not mean Lots of Love! - and you have to be very wary round here.)

Unfortunately, you are entering the thread at the moment I am retiring from it. It still has an interesting future, I feel, especially now Homintern is introducing the Buddhist justification for being thick-skinned. Partly I am leaving it out of consideration for the busy members of the Forum who really can't be expected to spend any more time on these topics. More importantly (and I feel sure Homintern will find this corroboratory evidence gratifying) I have made the decision in order to (to adapt the expression so loved of politicians who want, or have to, slip quietly out of public life) "spend more quality time with - but who else? - MYSELF". The capitals look good, don't they? I could type them all night!