Alleged message from Nathaniel Branden

[Mikee]

Gary,

(speaking of Charles Anderson)

"But, you would be wrong.

As usual. "

See. You have this tendency to keep talking until you go over the top. C.A. called you on it, gently. Politely. Even granted you the intelligence of someone who would get what he was saying. So what's with the big defensive posture? Is it beer? Too much testosterone? I happen to agree with most, if not all of what Charles has to say, and I enjoy hearing him say it. I like his backround, the work he does, his scientific bent on things, his website, his respect for the facts and gentleman's respect for people until they prove otherwise. And his disdain for unwarranted generalizations [otherwise called bigotry]. So when you say what I quoted, I think, "evidently G.W. usually gets it wrong, ". And I would be careful before I picked your side to be on, on a given issue. Is that what you're trying to achieve? It would have been better if you had said:

"Oops, I got a little carried away".

[gary williams]

(speaking of Charles Anderson)  

"But, you would be wrong.  

As usual. "  

See.

See what?

That in some way I am a homophobe? That the entire state of Texas is filled with homophobes? Based on what?

C.A. called you on it,

On what?

That in some way I am a homophobe? That the entire state of Texas is filled with homophobes? Based on what?

So what's with the big defensive posture?

Duh! Insinuation of homophobia!

Duh! Attacking an entire state!

And his disdain for unwarranted generalizations [otherwise called bigotry].

Kinda like the following generalizations -

Is it beer? Too much testosterone?

or Chuck's own -

to rise above this prejudice so common in Texas.

Yeah, me an tha' boyz sit here ohn tha' porch, pick'n ticks off our dawgs, n' drink'n sum beer n' moonshine, n' shoot'n tha' shit 'bout how racin' ain't tha' same since Dale Sr. died.

Hell, we got so work'd up we went out hunt'n cuz we felt like kill'n sumthang n' thar twarnt no queers abouts cuz we done went n' strung dem sissy boyz up er ran'm back out to Cal-ee-forn-I-A!

Oh, that's just how we are here in Texas! Every hillbilly, keg swill'n, bald because of to much testosterone one of us! Hell, that includes even the women folk!

Yeah, right!

I like his backround, the work he does, his scientific bent on things, his website, his respect for the facts and gentleman's respect for people until they prove otherwise.

As do I. However Chuck has a history of coming at me in a pompous, gentiel (sp) manner. I kinda think it is cute. Yet his manner, historically, in no less ad hominem than Perigo's.

Chuck does not like me. He does not like my style. My so called wit. Texas. Anythang....ahem....Anything from Texas.

Okie Dokie. Not a problem.

He thinks that I and everyone in the Great State of Texas are homophobes. I mean....

Why bring up Texas? Hmmmmmm? :-k

Could it be that his remark was one of those generalizations you hate so much or perhaps blatant bigotry toward "certain people in certain states!"

Could be he is just plain wrong.

And I would be careful before I picked your side to be on, on a given issue.

You have already chosen a side. And I don't care what you pick.

So when you say what I quoted, I think, "evidently G.W. usually gets it wrong, "

Its - gw! Can't you get it right?

And, I have no problem having someone proving I am wrong. Someone I respect. Along with proof.

Chuck is a sweet guy. I am sure you are sweet too!

Yet, both of you come after me for saying -

A small, wee willie'd, brokeback dreamin'

And yet, where the hell are the two of you when these things were being said? -

Brandens' poster-boy  

Barbara Branden's chief low-level supporter  

Slime  

Toxic slug  

Slippery  

Incomparably odious  

Dysfunctional  

New age  

Anti-conceptual acid fountainhead  

One hell of a disappointment  

Limp-dick  

Piece of shit  

Immoral scum who lie in practically every post  

Pompous ass of the first order  

Cockroach  

Crazed Cockroach Kelly  

Michael Stuart Kelly-Stuart-Stuart (Dizzy's most inept inspiration)  

Dishonest  

Vicious man with an evil agenda  

Laughable  

Stupid ideas  

Massive evasion  

Evader (used in simple mode, without the "massive")  

Pathological evader  

Mentally ill  

Fascist  

Christian  

Looter  

Scout master of Objectivism  

Perfectly reliable law of nature (I kinda like that one, too)  

Stridently-anal  

Snivelling self-indulgence  

Enslavement mentality  

Cane toad  

Idiot  

Uses altruism as his tool to create slaves  

Incapable of holding a coherent train of thought  

Morally unfastidious  

One of the most odious people I've ever encountered  

I doubt he is a sincere man  

So low a life-form  

Greatest licker and sucker of all  

Great Pretender himself  

Talking ape  

Male PMS  

A bit like Hemingway as a boxer  

For the Ojectivist Living site (in my homage, of course):  

Cockroach Corner  

Branden Community Church  

Nasty folks (malicious motive)  

Communist Living  

Intellectual/cultural ghetto for the Brandens  

Any port in a storm  

Branden Temple  

ObjectivistLying  

The anti-Rand site for Brandroids, back-stabbers & buttlickers

Remember! These were leveled at only one person!

Where were your high and mighty attacks on that name caller?

Will you now go and chastise that name caller on his own site?

No!

Hypocrite comes to mind again. Don't know why. Must be the word for the day!

And just for the record. I think most Brokeback Mountain jokes are hilarious! I really do. (Especially when they involve the sheep!)

My best friend tells them to me all the time! Good ones!

She kills me! She really does! We (me and her) watched the Indy 500 today!

We both lust after Danica Patrick!

Hmmmm? Maybe me n' da boyz shud string her up fer bee'n a cave yodeler?

Cave Yodeler? Get it? Thats what she calls lesbians!

She is a lesbian!

Oh my gawd! My lesbian best friend is a homophobe!

Never saw that coming!

Lastly, (Whewwwwww!)

Chuck said -

These are not relevant issues and this play on the prejudices of many, which have no doubt had a field day already with Linz, is hitting below the belt.

Yeah, right! I am sure he is quivering in a corner!

And, I really do think he has dreamed of Heath Ledger at least once! Or was that a sheep named Randy? Oh well.

Anyhow I gots ta git cuz, I gotta go rustle me up sum posseum fer supper! N' latter me n' sis er gonna get frisky! Iff'n you know whut I mean! Hee, hee!

Jody? Tis that yew I heer smack'n yer lips? That better be fer that posseum cuz I dun said that you Georgia fellers had better to stay away frum my sister!

Adieu!

G.W.

Er, I mean -

gw

P.S. - Mario Lanza is a small, wee willied, Brokeback dreaming.......

(for Rich!)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

How about some context for this shootout?

Charles is a good guy (a very good one).

Gary is a good guy (a very good one).

Mike is a good guy (a very good one).

Perigo is a bad guy (a mediocre one).

I don't know about Brokeback Mountain because I haven't seen it yet, but it did win three Academy Awards.

So Gary, I think you got it wrong about Charles. He wasn't asking you to tone it down about homophobic comments. He doesn't like anyone smearing the Academy Awards by association with the mediocre. (Who gains in prestige when Perigo and Brokeback are used in the same sentence?)

Michael

[Paul Mawdsley]

Gary,

There is a difference between the names Michael was called and what you dished out in you post here. You did it on Objectivist Living. Context determines appropriateness. Charles was objecting, as much as anything, to the context– especially the forum- in which you chose to wear the hat of the “counter-idiot.” Charles said, “... it still does not belong here....”

I certainly wasn’t offended by what you said. I get the spirit in which it was intended. In our politically correct world we too often are met by those who refuse to appreciate the intended spirit of a statement. It’s a simple means of social manipulation: misinterpret what someone says by intentionally reading it from a perspective and spirit other than that held by the author. This is the essence of how to make the “straw-man.” Take the author’s statements out of context, place them in a forged context that was not present in the author, and attack the forged context. It’s all smoke and mirrors but it really does influence the audience’s take on things. From what little I’ve seen, many Objectivist’s are quite adept at such social manipulations. This practice is one of the most obvious elements on SOLOP that has kept me away from any involvement there. It strikes me as the root of all the attacks on Barbara, Nathaniel, Chris, etc.

Getting back to you and Charles, while I get the spirit with which you intended your statement, I also get where Charles is coming from. I see in what Charles says about OL, in his posts, the same feeling of pride I experience at being a part of a community that represents values I believe in. There is a focus here on a respect for other people’s perspectives and for mutual consideration. One of the manifestations of this focus is to actually try to understand the spirit and the perspective of a person’s statements before one evaluates them. Another manifestation of this focus is to drop the name calling. Name calling undermines mutual respect and disrespects the values of OL, no matter how the name calling is camouflaged in humour.

If you find yourself attacking Charles, check your premises. He’s one of the good guys. Take some time to make sure you understand where he is coming from before attacking his character. I believe I have learned something about who he is. My judgement of Charles’ character says you are reading him wrong. If you want to attack him, you are wrong. Reevaluate!

BTW- If I’m not mistaken, Charles is originally from Texas.

Paul

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Paul is a good guy too (and a very good one).

Michael

[Charles R. Anderson]

Mikee, Paul, and Michael,

Thanks for your support. I appreciate it.

[Charles R. Anderson]

Gary,

Sorry, Gary, but it is not the case that I dislike you. Some aspects of your character I like and a few are minor irritations.

I like Texas. I like the cowboy as hero. I lived at Rod Field (a WWII Naval air station) when I was 5 to 8 years old and loved the 15 mile bike rides I used to take. I loved the horned toads. I thought the cottonmouths were fascinating, as were the scorpions, the tarantulas, and the copperheads. The abandoned barracks and the cotton bale filled hangars were a great play area. We had huge dirt clod forts in the freshly plowed cotton fields. Texas was a place of great adventures.

I also worked summers in Texas when I was in college. I lived in Gainesville one summer and worked with some very nice guys in the Red River oil field. Another summer I spent many weeks in the Texas panhandle. One of my best friends was born and raised in and could never leave Dallas. My oldest daughter graduated with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Texas at Austin. She is now buying a house in Houston.

My parents, two sisters, and my brother live in the Tulsa area. I also like Oklahoma in many ways, but it has some of the same limitations as does Texas. I graduated from high school in OK and also worked in the oil fields and on pipelines in OK.

But the many things I like in Texas come with a bit too much religion. So, I wish that the many good things about Texas were less compromised. But please do not exaggerate and say I hate or dislike Texas. I do not. It's more like expecting that something so good should be better. In many ways, I would be about as comfortable living in Texas as in Maryland. Religion is slightly less an issue here, but we have a more advanced stage of socialism. You cannot win on location. I am here mostly by virtue of employment in 1980 with the Navy and then my wife's license as a pharmacist.

That was quite a long list of names that Linz called Michael. I am impressed that you collected so many. But my point was that there is more than enough to criticize Linz that is real. It is simply more effective to stick with that and not give him a simple out. If you point out 10 serious errors on his part and call him a low-down homosexual, then all he has to do is point out that you are prejudiced and he does not have to answer to any of your 10 serious points. In reality, you make it too easy for him by turning to such foolish name calling yourself. With Linz, the best answer is that of simply setting a good example of being what a man ought to be. Or maybe it does not matter much to Linz, but it does matter to the people we want to reach and those we want to engage.

When you have to deal with the bad behavior of a child, it is better to be an adult, rather than another child.

Being serious about the importance of ideas, I do sometimes tend to the pedantic and even pompous. You are not without a point there. I like fun, but I prefer that it not be at the expense of furthering Objectivism.

On one issue, you slandered me seriously. I am not politically correct. Affirmative Action is racist. Men and women are different from one another. One of the most important reasons for going to a university is to discuss controversial issues. Putting most of them off-limits is stupid and also unconstitutional at a government-owned school. Group think and communitarianism are nonsense. On the other hand, homosexuality is not immoral. These are just the facts as I see them. I am generally glad to discuss these issues rationally with someone who wants to engage in a rational discussion about any of them.

So Gary, it is good to have a steady hand, whether to control your horse or your car, or your Peacemaker. I expect nothing less of a Texan.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Charles,

Gary did not compile that list of names I have been called on different forums and neither did Perigo originate all of them (although he did say a good many of them). As I said before, that would require more talent that he has.

I keep this list up to date in the Humor section here. The most recent addition was "skunk." I find this to be an inverted form of flattery.

Frankly, I don't want these people to say good things about me. When they called me those names, they showed clearly that there was a wide gap between them and me. I like it that way because I am VASTLY different than they are. We serve different gods, so to speak. My focus is on understanding the world and life - and producing. Theirs is on preaching and dominating others. I never want to be identified with that.

I confess that I have mixed feelings about you folks coming down so hard on Gary. He's a good guy with one hell of a comical writing style that I enjoy a lot. (As I do the posts of William Sherk, who is another with a charmingly quirky style.) I have no doubt in my mind at all that he is not a racist, homophobe, etc. (He certainly is a Texan, though. )

On the other side, I have no wish to see OL transformed into the kindergarten atmosphere of SOLOP. But I most definitely do not want to clip the wings of our more creative folk. It's a fine line to walk sometimes.

When I look into my own soul, if I see someone bashing Perigo, all is forgiven. Even homophobic remarks that I would disparage in general. All bashing of him warms my heart. I'll sign the confession. Gary's Brokeback remark made me laugh and I thoroughly enjoyed it, as I considered it limited to Mr. Piggo at SLOP only. (Not my finer moment, I admit, but there it is.)

//;-))

I can see how others become uncomfortable with this, though. It is a sour note in the symphony. If that seed grows, it becomes something quite ugly and not very funny like this. I don't think Gary's intent was to let it grow like that. I think it's just something that came off the cuff in the heat of creating a very funny post.

You are good at extending olive branches and have no malice at all in your heart that I can detect. (I am highly impressed by the interaction between you and Dennis Hardin on an inflammatory issue where you don't agree.) So I don't think you want to run Gary off. I think you merely wanted to point out something that made you uncomfortable at a place that brings you pleasure and a haven from the irrational destructive behavior in adults that often can be seen at Objectivist sites.

But he got offended - more so than what I believe you intended to convey. I admit that he did skate too near the edge for comfort but I don't find he went over over. How can this be worked out so that neither of you are offended?

Gary,

Don't you dare leave, you crazy Texan. That Postema guy might show up again somewhere, someday and need another lesson in how to read a dictionary, like here, here and here.

Remember the Alamo!!!!!!!!

Michael

[Paul Mawdsley]

Michael wrote:

*I confess that I have mixed feelings about you folks coming down so hard on Gary.*

I don’t think anyone came down hard but we did each make a personal point. We drew a line. I suggested, strongly, that Gary reevaluate his understanding of Charles’ character. Reevaluating, or seeing life anew, is healthy advise I try to apply to my own life everyday.

*He's a good guy with one hell of a comical writing style that I enjoy a lot.*

I agree. Certainly, my intent was not to gang-up. Personally, my point to Gary was that he should reconsider attacking Charles. I don’t have a problem with his humour pushing the envelope. Creative talent such as his has to be allowed to go to the edge. An understanding audience should realize that sometimes creative talent goes over the line. A receptive talent should realize that sometimes the audience will let him know where the line is.

My appreciation of Gary’s character suggests he is someone who can take reality head-on. If reality happens to be a little critical, I don’t think he is going to fade away. He will face the challenge with Texan determination. I hope Gary does not consider this grounds for leaving. This doesn't make sense to me. He has something of value to contribute and OL has something from which he can gain: win-win!

Paul

("Face life head-on, with your eyes wide open, and go though it not around it.")

[Kat]

OK guys, put the guns down. Now. We are not here to offend or be offended. Yes, it was inappropriate, but as I saw it, it was a dig at Linz, not gays in general. Linz is fair game. Gays are not. And it was humorous. Humor can occasionally cross the line into bad taste, but bigotry and personal attacks on other members is not something we condone here on Objectivist Living. It is not cool to attack people on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. I am personally offended by that type of thing, as are many others.

There may be times when we decide we don't like someone and want them to go away. This is not a game where we vote the others off the island. We are all on the same team. Please keep that in mind, leave your guns at the door, and try to not be so trigger happy. And please, keep to the ideas.

Kat

[gary williams]

Sorry Kat,

But,

This is a RANT thread. And, Rant I shall!

I repeat -

THIS IS A RANT THREAD!!!

Doesn't that add a little context to my.......behavior?

Betcha' you guys never considered that, huh?

To my fellow gunslingers -

Context again?

I did not attack Chuck. I counter-attacked.

Remember this? -

You are intelligent enough that I think it is reasonable to expect you to rise above this prejudice so common in Texas.

Where is the evidence associated with this accusation? Where is something non anecdotel? Where's the Beef?

I am not irritated over the statement being about Texas. It is simply a silly generalization of a group of people he has some sort of personal grudge against. It has no merit! He could have said it about any state.

I would have defended Maryland the same way! (not Oklahoma though, Those people are just plain icky!) ;-)

He could have said it about any state. But he didn't.

It was a puny attempt to zing me.

Puny!

Next,

I did not compile the list of Perigo-isms.

MSK keeps those in his trophy case. I only borrowed them.

Barbara has quite a few also. She keeps hers in the closet....

....in honor of him being.......well, you know!

Grow a sense of humor damn it! I am an equal opportunity offender.

I plan to hurt the feelings of Cossack dwarfs in my next Rant! Stay tuned!

Next,

I don't care where Chuck was born. I don't care where he has lived. Don't care where he has stopped and pee'd on a long road trip. Any of those analogies are non sequitor.

His statement was a sweeping indictment of a group of people based on his own subjective opinion. Period.

Is that not bigotry? Hmmmmmmmm?

Of course not. Neither was my lil' quip.

They were digs at individuals. Mine was, in my humble opinon, funny mockery. I was apeing the Great Ape. Goosing the Gander. I was being a grain of sand in an uncomfortable place etc...etc...

I do love those Brokeback jokes! Oh, by the way if you are offended by what I said - never watch Will and Grace reruns. Those people are such homophobes....

Note: I have found that the best Gay jokes come from the biggest Flamers! Really! (and, one really hot dyke!......oops, she's looking over my sholder right now!.......OWWWWW! Stop hitting me!!!!!)

Chuck's dig was, well, Chuck-esque. Try harder damn it!

Next,

Learn to recognize mockery.

I was mocking someone who in my opinion deserves it. Period.

I was doing a very bad impersonation of him.

(The New Zealand accent should have given it away!)

I know he is gay. He knows he is gay. We are both fine with it.

Brokeback Mountain jokes are not bigotry. They are no more bigoted than Chris Rock's or Richard Pryor's (R.I.P.) jokes about Honkey's. Oops, I said the H word!

Note: I can find you some articles and pictures that define the true nature bigotry. They are not funny.

I prefer to do something like that with a subject instead of supplying only anecdotes.

Individuals are bigoted. States are not. Do not lump people together because of your prejudices toward an area or people you do not like. That is not "nice!" And it falls under the big no-no of subjectivism.

Next,

Listen up!

Never insinuate that I have personal or socially prescribed prejudices.

I will not tolerate it from anyone. The gloves will come off and I will get serious. No one has the right to impune my reputation. Period.

This will not be repeated.

Consider yourselves warned.

Last,

Don't tell me how to live. Or think.

I own my life.

I made it myself.

I produced everything I have.

I have a bulletproof self esteem that would make Nathanial Branden cry!

I live my life with absolute integrity. You may not believe it - I don't care.

I live my life with absolute justice. You may not like it - I don't care.

I live my life with backbone. That may offend you - I don't care.

You say about life - "and go though it not around it."

I say - "I am a fucking Bulldozer, watch your toes!"

I grab reality by the balls and put it to work for me.

I live my life.

Please -

Don't tell me how to live. Or think.

Your not qualified.

Note: All of your points were taken. Seriously.

Doesn't make'm right!

gw

P.S. - Me leaving? Oh, please!!!!

I said nothing about leaving. That is just you guys getting it wrong again!

[-X

THUS ENDOTH THE RANT!

[gary williams]

Now, about a lil' Cossack -

"He is a small, wee willied, Doctor Zhivago dreamin'..........." #-o

tee hee!

Smile damn it!

gw

[Kat]

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Brokeback Mountain is about Montana, but didn't they shoot it in Texas?

(ducking...)

Michael

[Paul Mawdsley]

Gary wrote:

Don't tell me how to live. Or think.  

I own my life.  

I made it myself.  

I produced everything I have.  

I have a bulletproof self esteem that would make Nathanial Branden cry!  

I live my life with absolute integrity. You may not believe it - I don't care.  

I live my life with absolute justice. You may not like it - I don't care.  

I live my life with backbone. That may offend you - I don't care.  

You say about life - "and go though it not around it."  

I say - "I am a fucking Bulldozer, watch your toes!"  

I grab reality by the balls and put it to work for me.  

I live my life.  

Please -  

Don't tell me how to live. Or think.  

Your not qualified.

I think I know Gary better now. He is as thick skinned as I thought. Good! I like to know who I'm dealing with when I am being spanked. I hate eggshells. Now I know I don't have to walk on them. I'm hard to offend. Just don't mess with my friends, unless you're one of them.

Gary, I'll never keep up with you. I'm just not that funny. (But I do have a theory why I'm not that funny. It's because I'm always creating theories, not funnies.) On the other hand, I do appreciate what you do. Reading work like yours is like taking my sense of humour to the gym. I don't have to play anything to stay fit.

Paul

[gary williams]

Paul,

I see where you are coming from.

And, there is no point in trying to keep up. We are not in a competition.

To wax poetic for a moment -

It's like two souls walking next to a mountain stream, with the cold water trickling by and we're discussing life and........................................

I just get a kick out of watching you cuss me for pushing you into the water!

Seriously,

Having fun and having theories are not mutually exclusive.

I had a theory once.

Stole it from somebody.

It went kinda like this -

I think one should "Face life head-on, with your eyes wide open, and that way, when sombody does something stupid, you will see it and can laugh at them!"

Anyhew,

No hard feeling on this end. Towards you anyway.

MSK however!

I heard that damn Brokeback / Texas remark! [-( If I were gay I would be so............Hey? Thats strange?

Why were you speaking in a New Zealand accent?

Hmmmmm? :-k

Kat,

Nice picture! Your a real pistol!

Were you loaded when that was taken?

gw

[Paul Mawdsley]

Gary wrote:

And, there is no point in trying to keep up. We are not in a competition.  

To wax poetic for a moment -  

It's like two souls walking next to a mountain stream, with the cold water trickling by and we're discussing life and........................................  

I just get a kick out of watching you cuss me for pushing you into the water!  

I have a friend who does things like this to me. Just one! I don't think I have the energy for more than one. It comes naturally to him but it takes a lot of effort for me to push him in the water as many times as he pushes me.

I have to say, he brings out my more manic, fun side. I have to go now. I have to start planning next weeks pranks.

Paul

[gary williams]

Paul,

I have to say, he brings out my more manic, fun side.

You get it!

You have caught up!

It's called being human.

Every so often,

Drop the Theories, the Metaphysics, the

Epista.....Episto....Episti.........Epistowhatchamacallit.....damn it! #-o

for a few moments and.......laugh!

Push someone into the water....or get pushed into the water! Don't analyse it. Live it!

Sometimes a genuine ...........Baaaahaaahaaaa! Is all that is needed for truthfull interaction.

Laughter is communication!

Do not worry about other peoples perceptions.

Do not worry how IT will be taken.

Do not worry if Ayn or Jesus laughed! (Absurd!)

Laugh damn it!

Be amused!

Enjoy observing the absurd!

Do not value anything other than your own happiness......now!

Laugh! Damn It!

Objectivism includes laughter!

It's called being human.

gw

P.S. - You are starting to grow on me.

Stop it!

[Paul Mawdsley]

Do not worry about other peoples perceptions.  

Do not worry how IT will be taken.  

Do not worry if Ayn or Jesus laughed! (Absurd!)  

Laugh damn it!  

Be amused!  

Enjoy observing the absurd!  

Do not value anything other than your own happiness......now!  

Laugh! Damn It!  

Objectivism includes laughter!  

It's called being human.

Gary, I have one question: what makes you damn qualified to tell me how to live? [-X

Paul //;-))

[gary williams]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

YOU WIN!!!!!!!!!!!!

gw

[Paul Mawdsley]

Gary, you wrote:

*I have a bulletproof self esteem that would make Nathanial Branden cry!

I live my life with absolute integrity. You may not believe it - I don't care.

I live my life with absolute justice. You may not like it - I don't care.

I live my life with backbone. That may offend you - I don't care.*

I have had a thought. There seems to be different self-appraisals related to different contexts. If we bring different states of consciousness into different contexts, do we bring different self-images and different measures of self-esteem into these different contexts? If we bring different measures of self-esteem into different contexts, are different aptitudes required for generating our self-esteem in different contexts? Or is there one standard set of aptitudes that is transferable between contexts?

The reason I ask these questions is the way you describe your self-esteem is very different from the way I experience mine. Although I do consider myself to have very strong self-esteem, I would not describe it as bulletproof. The description you give of self-esteem conjures up an image of “The Man of Steel.” You have strong self-esteem in social contexts because others can’t hurt you. They can’t hurt you because you “don’t care.”

The self-esteem in social contexts, suggested by your bulletproof reference, seems to come from a self that is armored against social weaponry. It is untouchable. My self-esteem in social contexts tends to come from a self that has come to understand social weaponry which allows me to defuse the weapons. You describe Superman sticking out his chest to stop bullets. I imagine myself to be Neo reading the encrypted code of the bullets, making them harmless.

I’m not suggesting you have one kind of self-esteem and I have another. I am saying you are describing one approach to self-esteem in social contexts and I am describing another. I’m sure we each apply both methods to coping with the crap that can be thrown at us. It seems that these are different aptitudes supporting self-esteem: one keeps out negative information about the self; the other takes in the negative information and renders it harmless. Depending on context, I think both are important tools to have at one’s disposal. Being able to fire off a series of one-line missiles with the threat of the occasional nuclear warhead keeps opponents off balance also.

Paul

PS-- If you want me to leave you alone, stop saying things that make me think!

[Charles R. Anderson]

Gary,

OK, one could say that homophobia is common in whatever state of the union we may be talking about. I do not think it is worthy wherever it resides.

When someone includes in a list a number of bad traits of a person that they are clearly unhappy with, terms that play on the prejudices of others, this is a bad thing in my perspective. It does suggest that one holds those prejudices oneself. Of course, you apparently only thought this humorous.

I just did not share your sense of humor on this. Our senses of humor are less than fully compatible.

Get over it. Or don't. Your choice.

[gary williams]

Paul,

This is weird, because I have had something simular to what you are talking about rattling around in my pea brain for a few days now.

I haven't been able to pin it down yet as I have been a tad busy. But I am working on it.

Chuck,

Get over it. Or don't. Your choice.

Yes, I know.

gw

[reason.on]

Does anyone know what Lindsay Perigo is talking about here?

http://www.solopassion.com/node/893#comment-8440

...I learned something fascinating today that possibly explains why the TOCians have fled to safe territory such as the TOC frord board, where they're in no danger of being challenged by these awful ARIans running rampant on SOLO. Evidently in the not-too-distant past, Nathaniel & Barbara sent out a message to various people (separate from and prior to Smearer-in-Chief's exhortations to that effect on Objectivist Lying) asking them not to post here. One person who refused to comply was then told by Nathaniel not to speak to him again. Of course, Nathan is entirely within his rights, but observe the screechings from the Brandroid "tolerationists" when a Binswanger behaves in that way.

I haven't received any such message from Nathaniel. Maybe that just proves that I'm out of the loop...

Robert Campbell

Holy crap! THIS (I read the whole thread) is what poor Perigo was talking about as I was leaving his dominion?! I had no idea.

RCR

Edited August 17, 2006 by R. Christian Ross

[Robert Campbell]

RCR,

That particular quote from Lindsay Perigo dates back to mid-May.

To use his idiom, Mr. Perigo is on about other topics these days.

Robert Campbell