Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1999 04:57:30 -0600
From: Bruce Hagood <hagood-AT-ro.com>
Subject: Re: aesthetic bottoms


Hey, I'm not pissed off.  Just amused about a tempest in a teapot.

Live long and prosper...

      BH

ROBERT C. THOMAS wrote:

> My post was only as vulgar as sex, itself, is. And once again, all of the
> critical ideas contained in my two posts were completely lost on someone
> who seems far more concerned with defending something called "personal
> preferences" than with thinking about sex.  The intent of my post wasn't
> to piss you off or to call into question your "personal preferences," but
> to go beyond the very notion of "personal preferences." In other words,
> the notion of an "aesthetic bottom" has nothing to do with sexual
> preferences. Men who love pussy can be "aesthetic bottoms." In fact, one
> could argue that the world would be a better place if more hetersexual men
> chose to enter into composition with this "force." ANY ONE, with any
> "personal preference" can choose to be an "aesthetic bottom." The
> potential meaning of this term, as a kind of concept, is so unstable, so
> relational, that even a cartoon like Homer Simpson could be described as
> an "aesthetic bottom." So I don't get where this..."you don't understand
> or have respect for my personal preference"  crap is coming from. I think,
> perhaps, you are reading both more and less into my "vulgar"  discussion
> than is actually there: more, in the sense that I am reacting against your
> preference (which I am clearly *not* doing) and less, in that what I am
> doing is drawing attention to critical issues of sex, desire, singularity,
> passivity, and relationality. Sex *is* brutal and vulgar and talking about
> it in the kind of sanitized language of heterosexist normativity is an
> effort to transcend that brutality; to re-present it as something much
> "safer" than it really is.
>
> robert
>
> On Tue, 5 Jan 1999, Bruce Hagood wrote:
>
> > Well, I expected an overrreaction and I got it.  I'll excuse your vulgarity for you:
> > I most certainly did NOT mean to even imply that vulgar expression which you repeated
> > several times.  You are telling us all much more about yourself than about me.
> >
> > Take my words at face value and be glad that we are all live and let live on this
> > list.  I have no desire to tell anyone else what do with their private lives.  Do
> > whatever you want in the privacy of your own home; I could care less!  As long as you
> > don't knowingly hurt anyone else through your actions, nobody should/could find fault
> > with you.
> >
> > But in stating my personal preferences, I didn't intend any harm.
> >
> >        BH
> >
> > ROBERT C. THOMAS wrote:
> >
> > > This is really disturbing. I posted something that was simultaneously
> > > funny, alive, and critical about the potential meaning of "aesthetic
> > > bottoms." Two of the three responses have said nothing more than, "I love
> > > pussy." It's great that you love pussy, but what does that have to do with
> > > what I wrote? And why did you feel the need to send a message to the list
> > > telling everyone on it that you love pussy? I'd really like to know. From
> > > where I stand, this appears to be a strange, creepy, and subtle form of
> > > homophobia. Call me naive, but I didn't expect this kind of defensive
> > > response from male heterosexuals. It must really touch a chord in you to
> > > respond like this, especially given the fact that you prefaced your
> > > response by the following: "I'd rather talk to a beautiful woman about the
> > > meaning of life." In a very subtle way, your comment equates normative
> > > male hetersexuality with "all" sex. According to the twisted logic of
> > > heterosexist normativity, sex is not about sex but "the meaning of life"
> > > and beauty resides in "the everlasting possession of the good" (Plato,
> > > Symposium) through a union of two incomplete parts that make a (w)hole
> > > (ibid). The defense against the fetishization or better yet, the
> > > singularization of buttholes in my post is obviated in your choice of
> > > words. I suppose that when you are talking about the "meaning of life"
> > > with a beautiful woman that you aren't fantasizing about what you want to
> > > do to and with her various holes? In the end, what is so disturbing about
> > > your post is that you can't even allow yourself to say "I love pussy."
> > > Instead, you have to hind behind some kind of bullshit like "beauty" and
> > > "the meaning of life." Finding beauty and the meaning of life in the
> > > encounter between mouth and pussy (preferably while you are tied-up,
> > > helpless, and the twat is being shoved in your face), is probably more
> > > than you can bear. Too bad for you.
> > >
> > > On Tue, 5 Jan 1999, Bruce Hagood wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'd rather talk to an attractive woman about the meaning of life, than fantasize
> > > > about a "rosey" butthole.  It's a personal problem, I guess.  Oh well...  :)
> > > >
> > > > A. Sarah Hreha wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > At 06:11 AM 1/1/99 -0600, you wrote:
> > > > > >Well, the list may or may not be bored.  But I can think of other ways--much
> > > > > >better ones--to stave off boredom!   They tend to involve women.  :)
> > > > >
> > > > > In what do they involve women?
> > > > >
> > > > > *~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*
> > > > > A. Sarah Hreha
> > > > > Dept of Spanish and Portuguese
> > > > > University of Minnesota
> > > > > *~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*~~~*
> > > > >
> > > > >   "En un momento dado me detuve
> > > > >    a fumar un cigarrillo y a pensar.
> > > > >    Ese fue mi error."  Sergi Puertas
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >