Can we have a Wanker's Corner?

[onebatmother]

Hello.

It's been noted in the past that there are some pretentious wankers amongst us who like to discuss some general subjects (eg.Porn, Religion) in a fairly, erm.. academic manner, and that this sometimes seems to intimidate and/or infuriate other posters.

There doesn't seem to be an easy solution to this problem: there's no doubt that people really do feel intimidated and that it might prevent them from posting on a subject that concerns them. It also must feel hijack-y at times.

At the same time, it's hard for the Wanker's to be told that they mustn't post anything that might intimidate.

Would it be possible to have a special place, with very hard chairs to keep us awake, that we may call our own?

Naked mumsnetting

Good lord. and awe.

Swedes, I see your goatee is getting rather out of hand, actually. I have called Butterflies of Chingford and booked you in, since Frau Koch is notoriously busy during the summer months.

I've put a new pic on my profile

who is that bat? < haven't read whole thread since i last wandered in>
how very rude

It's me you fool,doing some naked MN-ing like Swedes and Threadie! I've toned up a bit since then, though, obviously.

don't you tell fibs.

I know about you.

you live in a cave and hang upside down. So stop trying to tell me big fat porky-pies!!

damn. okay then, you're right.

At least Swedes' pic has the virtue of highlighting her remarkable resemblance to her hero Karl Marx.

your arse can't be as fat as that anyway

I say she needs her hair brushing

(just imagine the skidder potential on your Best Office Chair too)

I pondered a long time about the presidential nude volleyball scandal that I had somehow missed reading about, before I figured out that JFK probably stands for 'just for kicks'?

lol. no, I was showing off to Swedes, who quoted the Oliver Stone-directed bio-pic about mysteries and enigmas..

Ahh. I genuinely thought it was a reference to a lonely-hearts-type abbreviation. 'Just for kicks' would have worked so well for nude volleyball with stout boots. I did wonder how you knew pervy lonely hearts terminology.

I too would benefit from a wankers' coroner. Corner.

waits

hello Mr Liz. you need your own name

Ladies, may I introduce Mr Liz. He posted something about "gendered social and cultural practices" on the (80th) lapdancing thread and I told him there about a place where he could go, where no-one would mock (ie. groomed him)

(look out for Swedes though, she's definitely undecided on the mockery front..)

Gosh onebat, I don't usually go on the porn-analysis threads (not feeling that I have much of interest to contribute) but I went there in search of an explanation of why you are calling Liz a man (which I now understand) and I thought that your post of 09:33:15 was very spectacular and spot on.

Actually, having been (I think) guilty to some extent of a projection of my own thoughts onto Daniel Deronda, it might be that I am projecting on to your very insightful post too much of what I think I believe (in a very vague and ill-informed way) about pornography.

That is, I don't have very much objection to pornography as such, in isolation from all of the social context that we have to accept defines its significance or otherwise. What I think I object to is the fact that its pervasiveness in a society where commercial dynamics collude with desire to overproduce it traduces women and female sexuality in much the same way that fruitshoots and cheesestrings traduce real food.

Processing, conversion into commodity, the substitution of a socially constrained simulacrum in place of something real. This is what happens wherever there is commodification (and I saw your post, perhaps wrongly, as chielfy about treating pornography as a special case of consumerist commodification).

The hideous thing is that real women then imitate the simulacrum.

Very vague and ill-informed, not to say trite. I suppose what I mean to convey is that the reason I don't get very exercised by pornography in particular is that it is a special case of something which in general is fucking up the world.

(In relation to which sentiment, by the way, I was very impressed by the anti-consumerist satire in the film WALL-E, ironically produced by a big corporation like the one it castigates. You see, even the anti-commodification message has become commodified.)

Stop wittering and go to bed, Thread.

no, threadie, I certainly agree with you and think that is implied - though not as eloquently expressed (not on wanker's corner for a start and as you may know I've got into trouble at least twice for being a wnaker on porn threads - I think that's what prompted Wanker's Corner actually.

there is another post later on which gets closer.

I despise both the process and the artefact, the first for the reasons you mention, the latter because of its unique position as both the manifestation of women's cultural and social disempowerment and the means by which said disempowerment is reproduced.

So a strange combo of smart postmodernism and social politics.

Full me, onebat, that was most eloquently put, if I may say so

... and I meant fuck me, of course. I've no idea where full came from!!

I loathed that about Wall-E! Vile, vile film. Happy ending especially vile. Co-opting, emptying of meaning, making safe anti-consumerism

I weell full you desiderata eef you will let me.

Oh! OK!

"I despise both the process and the artefact, the first for the reasons you mention, the latter because of its unique position as both the manifestation of women's cultural and social disempowerment and the means by which said disempowerment is reproduced."

I don't understand and I want to. I mean, I don't understand the 'over-and-above' constituted by the artefact as distinct from the process.

Actually, you've already done sterling explanatory work on that thread (19:39:12 post is extremely interesting). So don't feel you have to duplicate it here.