Re: jewelia@erols.com//unfortunate remarks

And let me add that a lack of knowledge as to intention has never
prevented Judy from leveling charges of sexism against male members
of this list. She has been rather free and easy with that charge.

For what it is worth I found all of the comments about Jewelia
inappropriate, insensitive and offensive. And that includes Judy's
comments as well as the subsequent comments by males.

Sandy

>Ms Seigel,
>
>My interpretation of your communication is done, as with everyone
>else not on a judicial bench, without "authority". Your remark to
>me seemed open to very little interpretation, and I still find it
>demeaning and discriminatory.
>
>I think that your references to me, personally ("sounding off in
>ignorance", being "too judgmental...for reality". being a possible
>sexist and so on) are unfortunate.
>
>
>John Ptak
>
>JF Ptak Science Books
>&
>Longstreet Antiquarian Maps & Prints
>8 Biltmore Avenue
>Asheville, NC
>http://www.thesciencebookstore.com
>jfptak@thesciencebookstore.com
>
>
>>
>>I don't know who you are or from whence comes your authority to
>>interpret (or, I suspect, misinterpret) my words. You have yet to
>>contribute any of your own -- and it's always struck me as an
>>especially cheap shot when a lurker dashes out from the safety of
>>his/her cave to denounce what they never helped build and have
>>hardly a clue about. So, besides sounding off in ignorance (what I
>>said above is the absolute literal truth, and I daresay how the
>>character herself would have put it), you may be too
>>judgmental/refined/sensitive/conventional for this list -- let
>>alone for reality. (Also sexist? You have yet to denounce a man
>>thusly, at least on this list, and there have been a few quite
>>denounceable moments this season.)
>>
>>True, I am a tad puzzled -- what in the world bothered you enough
>>to break silence? How would YOU have put it? Perhaps you've had a
>>sex change yourself (or one of your near and dear ones has) and are
>>super-sensitive on the subject? Relax. Really. I have simply told
>>the truth as Jewelia herself told it -- to me and to whoever else
>>would listen, ever and always laying it on with trowel, hammer, and
>>gusto -- plus often enough no small amount of charm. (Jewellia, of
>>course, was Jewellia Margarita Cameroon, who knew a great deal
>>about paper and processes and whose departure from the list was
>>regretted by many. Her birth name was Richard someone.)
>>
>>As it happens, however, the NEXT character was rather stronger, tho
>>from some (obviously misplaced) delicacy of my own I omitted to
>>mention that the person s/he became directly upon the demise of
>>"Jewellia" had a longish name ending in "Poor Cunt" -- the prefix
>>escapes me now. The persona was (maybe someone else can help with
>>this), I think Native American (?).
>>
>>Somewhere or other, unless I needed the space and discarded it, I
>>have Poor Cunt's ramble about several of her incarnations...(I
>>thought Poor Cunt was the weakest, and so doubly doubt it was the
>>last.)
>>
>>I had, however, spent two full weeks of my remaining time on earth
>>attempting to satisfy J. with an edit of her "article" for
>>Post-Factory, which was promised to be about Uranium printing.
>>S/he changed her mind -- several times -- and ultimately declared
>>that it was to be "performance art" about her character(s) or some
>>form of written art, I forget the exact term, and would require the
>>entire issue.
>>
>>Moreover, having been dissatisfied with exposure in "alternative
>>photography," the audience being too small, and a recent show at a
>>university having been a disappointment, s/he had decided to head
>>for a different arena.
>>
>>At that point I cut my losses. So, I suggest, might you.
>>
>>Judy
Received on Wed Mar 9 12:00:46 2005