Composers' Forum

Music Composers Unite!

There are very few people using insults, but can we please have zero people using insults? It only takes one person writing insults to tarnish the spirit of the forum. If you use insults here (I just read some terrible content here today!), not only is that immoral, as it also diminishes the participation, meaning, and value of this forum. So please stop doing this.

The forum is for discussing, debating, arguing, sharing, marveling, philosophizing, whatever, of course! IT's ABSOLUTELY NOT FOR USING INSULTS, is it? Don't insult members of the forum for whatever reason. Don't insult religious beliefs. Don't insult specific ethnic groups. Or you turn this forum into a horrible place where no self-respecting people will come back to.

Several people have practically halted their participation because of recent racist content in the forum and because of individual members being insulted. While I would have preferred that they complain openly and stay, they chose to stay away. It's everybody's loss. I am complaining openly and staying, although I cannot gather the motivation to upload music.

PLEASE DON'T RESPOND TO THIS THREAD. There's no point, and I dread to have to read responses. It is such a simple a basic thing I can't imagine there's anything at all to discuss about this! 

[Since a discussion ensued anyway, I'm crossing out the original request to not respond, since anyone should feel free to join an ongoing discussion.]

Please just don't insult people in any of the other threads, that's all. Respect other people's integrity, respect yourself, and respect the forum.

Views: 5717

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

 

Hello, Roger.

 

I just noticed you said,

 

"Like Sherlock Holmes, you must find the clues hidden in plain view . Would Dr. Watson say,' don't look there, that would be anti-semitic'?  "

 

I doubt if he would, because Watson appears to have been, in all likelihood, an anti-Semite himself.  If anything, he would say, "Look there, because Jews are involved."

 

You said,

 

He might, but that wouldn't stop Holmes from his quest for the facts."

 

Or, it could be the case, that Holmes (acting in accordance with his character, as his author conceived him) might actually deliberately seek to target Jews, due to his own anti-Semitic prejudices.  Holmes didn't like Jews.

 

You might be interested to know that both Sherlock Holmes and Watson were anti-Semitic, as evidenced by their own words in a number of stories. This has been pointed out by some contemporary thinkers, who have carefully studied the issue.  Later in his life, when Holmes' creator (Arthur Conan Doyle) had finished writing stories about Sherlock (during the 1920's), he jettisoned his own prejudice and became "philo-Semitic," a lover of the Jewish people.

 

Consider these paragraphs, I found in a short article, as a partial explanation of the Sherlock Holmes' own anti-Semitism.

 

"As such Doyle's Holmes does reflect the ideas of his time, but he also goes further by portraying jews as unscrupulous usurers and con-artists on several occasions. As well as even once suggesting; by the use of a jewish surname, that an American woman from Atlanta; Mrs Hebron, who slept with and had a child by a negro; and who calls herself a 'betrayer of her race'  and whose sexual union with a negro Holmes and Watson both refer to as 'unnatural'.

 

[So Holmes and Watson don't like "negroes" either].

 

"As Mrs Hebron; in spite of her revealing self-description, is proud of what she has done as the negro was a 'good man': we can suggest that what is being depicted by Doyle here; irrespective of his much later personal comments on the subject of jews, is jews are race-mixers par extraordinaire and are acting as the vanguard of a new racially mixed civilisation and in essence that jews are the enemies of the West who are destroying it by racially-mixing to protect themselves.

 

"Thus Holmes should be described as something of a foe of the jews and in stark contrast to Doyle's much later public philo-Semitism during the 1920s and 1930s."

 

That's one way of looking at the issue, anyway. 

 

Hello, Fredrick.  Hello Roger.  Comments for both of you below.

 

You said, Fredrick,

 

"Oh how sweet. Now lets all hold hands and sing Kumbaya."

 

I am not sure what you are referring to as "sweet," or why you would (or would not) want anyone to sing Kumbaya.  I have never sung Kumbaya, but I understand it is simply a song that calls on people to come together to help the unfortunate.   Those in interested in the history of that particular song can read about it here:

 

http://www.loc.gov/folklife/news/pdf/FCNews32_3-4_opt.pdf

 

I don't profess to know much about it. Fredrick, is your apparent sarcasm due to the fact that you object to "holding hands," or to collective singing while holding hands?  Is it that you don't like songs about coming together to help people in need, in a spirit of fraternity, or that you don't like something else associated with that particular song?

 

Hello Roger,

 

I watched some of the video.  So let me ask a few questions, and get your interpretation of it, and your take on what happened on 9-11, and then I'll give you mine.  I have a done a fair amount of research on it, but I wouldn't claim to know the "whole story."  I am not sure who could tell the entire story, other than those involved.

 

A huge amount is probably still hidden, and as you say, and even Hamilton admitted, the official report was basically a white wash.

 

So here are my starting questions.  How would you evaluate each of the following statements, as regards their truth or falsity?

 

1.  Mossad agents were responsible for the destruction that occurred on Manhattan on 9-11.

 

2.  CIA Agents were responsible for the destruction that occurred on Manhattan on 9-11.

 

3.  Saudi Arabian intelligence was responsible for the destruction that occurred on Manhattan on 9-11.

 

4.  US military intelligence and personnel were responsible for the destruction that occurred on Manhattan on 9-11, including and all the way up to Donald Rumsfeld.

 

5.  Dick Cheney was responsible for the destruction that occurred on Manhattan on 9-11, as a coordinator and overseer of the plot.

 

6.  It was a joint effort of all of the above.

 

Please let me know what you think, applying the label "true" or "false" to the above statements, adding any additional comments, and then I would like to go on from there.

 

 

 

 

Hello, Fredrick.  I want to say a few things about our recent exchanges and then ask of you a small favor.  I don't think you will dislike doing it.  It's at the end of the post.

 

You said,

 

"OO Why would I answer your questions when you wont answer mine?"

 

 

I did answer your questions, in fact, some of them I have had to answer three times or more.  This is because you seemed to have forgotten what I wrote.  You have repeated innumerable times the question about the meaning of "we" for instance.

 

You asked it again, here, in your last post.  The same question.  Look:

 

'Who is the "we" and us you refer to in your speeches?'

 

There's the question once more.  I predicted you would probably ask it again.  Just scroll back on the "Most Beautiful Symphony" thread.  You'll see that I answered it there just yesterday, and predicted you would ask it again. I answered it the day before yesterday.  It's been asked and answered quite a few times already.  I also said, in a friendly way, that you should feel free to ask it, seven or more times if you want to.  But it's moments like this that make me wonder, on and off, if you really are all right.  

 

I certainly don't mean to suggest you are infirm (as you said I might be suggesting).  Nevertheless, what am I to make of your asking the same question over and over, and forgetting what I have said, again and again?

 

At first I thought it was just a kind of humorous rhetorical strategy you were using; but there's something about it now, or the way you are doing it now, that really makes me a bit concerned.  It leads me to think you are not at this point in time (during recent days, at least) remembering what has been written on these threads.

 

In your last post, you say,

 

 

"In fact, why do I even bother talking to you all. You are not worth the effort. As far as me being an islamophobe. by yhour continued unfounded accusations YOU are the one acting the racist."

 

This is what I find disconcerting.  You are not remembering what I said.  For instance, look at your words above. Compare them with what I actually said.  I said, in my last post on Islamophobia, that I WAS NOT CALLING YOU an Islamophobe.  I was very specific about that.  Scroll back, and you will see.  I said, that some statements you made could be considered "Islamophobic." That's quite different, and in no way should be thought of as a reflection on your character, or your person, as if I were saying YOU were an Islamophobe, or a racist of any kind.  I am not saying that. 

 

 

This is another area where I am concerned.  I have replied several times to what you have said about Islamophobia, as a word and a concept.  I have pointed out that, as I am using the term, it does not in any primal or essential sense reflect narrowly the psychological state "fearing Muslims" (because the generally accepted definition speaks of a kind of antipathy towards Muslims, a prejudice—though a fear can be there which accompanies the prejudice and antipathy).  But when all is said and done, I am not talking about your attitudes, as such.  I am simply talking about your use of certain phrases, such as "Muslim mumbo-jumbo," which is prejudicial and biased.

 

A problem arises when I analyze and explain the definition, and you don't simply disagree with it.  You act (and I mean genuinely act) and speak as if you didn't hear a word I said, on the subject.  And then you repeat almost exactly what you said earlier. 

 

It's a cause for concern, and I am not joking when I say you might want to see a memory specialist about this, and have your memory tested.  There is no shame in that.  Many people, as they age, have memory problems.  It's common.  There are all sorts of mnemonic exercises one can do, and there are changes in diet one can make, and nutritional supplements that a person can take.  (And if you don't like my saying this, because you consider me "an adversary" or even "an enemy," at times, just think about it a little bit.  Nothing said in this paragraph, if you did any of it, could possibly harm you.   A trip to the doctor, memory exercises, supplements and attention to diet can only help a person).

 

 

Perhaps my suggestions are good, or perhaps they don't make any difference.  In any case, now I will ask you for a bit of help.

 

Please do me this favor:

 

At the end of your post, you say to me, "YOU are the one acting the racist."  Perhaps you genuinely think so.  So I ask you this most sincerely:

 

If I have said something recently that could be considered racist, I would like you (or anyone) to point it out, so I can improve my speech. I would like to make it as free as possible from statements that could be construed as ethnocentric, racist, sexist or prejudicial.   So I welcome your input in that area, if you wish to help.  Mariza on one or two occasions pointed to statements I made which she considered sexist.  I accepted her admonition.  I don't mind someone saying a statement of mine is "racist" if they can point to it, and say why they think it is.  So I am open to the charge, and to considering it, if you really think one or more of my statements qualifies as ethnocentric or racist.

 

I personally believe that there is a more scientific reason why there will never be "peace" on this forum. This forum is full of two things: males and composers, and our personalities lean heavily towards something called The Perfect Melancholy while The Peaceful Phlegmatics are baffled asking, "Why can't we all just get alone?" Here's more information concerning perfect melancholies: http://www.kerrijokala.com/understanding-personalities-perfect-mela...

Well said, Mariza! Very well said!

Unfortunately, or fortunately, I don't know what really had been said, and I suppose I don't want to know. But I am glad someone takes action (and a shame it are always the same who do).

As we say in Holland (in some fake Spanish): Muchos kudos! (That is a compliment!)

We don't need to wait until life is perfect before we can follow such a basic rule as not insulting other people.

We don't need to wait for anything at all, it is something we can do right away, by... let's see...  by not insulting other people.

Males including composer males can do this as well as anybody can.  Bob, Erwin, Ondib, Teoh, Michael, Paul, Tyler, Stephen, Philip, and countless other male composers on this forum prove that by their own example, as if it was even necessary.

Beliefs about human nature change continuously throughout human history.  People are always claiming that this and that cannot be achieved because it is against human nature.  Honestly, it's getting into the ridiculous when such claims are taken as far as something as basic as not insulting others.  Fredrick claims he cannot help but insult other people because... why, let's see why... oh, because he's human.  Rodney explains it might be because he is a male and a composer.  Uh-huh... 

Hola Erwin,  ¡Muchos kudos para ti tambien!  Me gusto mucho tu mensage. 

Mariza

Fredrick,

Some times there is a grey zone, and you are jokingly pretending that my post (and presumably any post) falls into a grey zone where it is a matter of personal interpretation and individual sensitivity as to whether one has been insulted or not.  You are suggesting that it is as relative, legitimate, and maybe even likely, for you to feel insulted by my latest post, as it is for someone to feel insulted by your calling them a "loathsome cockroach".  I'm quoting the words you used - only a couple of days ago you called Ondib that, within a barrage of other insults of similar abyssal level. 

Is it because the topics at hand are so "emotional" to you?  No, it is not.  You have used awful insults in a discussion about mathematics - a topic that seems unlikely to get anyone's blood boiling.  You claimed that the infinite sum of all positive integers was -1/12.  Ondib took the time to correct you on that one and to explain where the pseudo-proof failed.  Your response, despite the fact that you yourself had brought up the math subject, was to fire a barrage of insults.

The insults you write in this forum, on pretty much a daily basis, do not fall into a grey zone.  They are very insulting, very offensive.  Very clearly intended to be insulting and offensive.  It is also clear that you are on a sort of quest, relentlessly looking for opportunities to insert one more insult into the various threads in this forum.  It appears to be a sort of sport for you.  You enjoy it.  Nobody else does, I believe.  We all wish you would stop.  Socrates suggested you should compose more.  There you go!   A healthy, productive sport that you're good at.

Sincerely,

Mariza

Fredrick zinos said:

Mariza. I am highly insulted by your last post. And because I say I am insulted, well, therefore I must be. So I think you need to evolve into a person who doesn't insult anyone. I'll give you 15 minutes to change. Oh and by the way, I and I alone will be the person to tell you if you have met the goal.

Now, if you don't comply I'll go running to my mommy and tell her what a bad person you are.

Including yourself? ;-)  (Sorry, couldn't resist...  and now I suppose I'm included as well.)

Dave and Teoh,

Like Bob said (in a different way), people are not obligated to accommodate my requests.  And I agree with that.

At least nobody has written any insults here, for which I'm glad.

Fredrick,

No dog is ugly, especially to their human friend.  :-)

BTW, my cat (secretly) supports your life philosophy.

Mariza

Fredrick zinos said:

Oh well let me change that..

Mariza, your dog is ugly.

I've noticed that too, Dave, that everyone is nice in the chat room.

Dave Dexter said:

I think by now the damage is done! Just strikes me as funny that someone beseeches others to improve the level of conversation and not to reply, and so a lot of people reply and end up arguing about the same kind of fatuous drivel that was the genesis of the post. Now, a phrase like "fatuous drivel" is potentially insulting, but I got frustrated. The chat is much nicer. I should stay in chat. :)

H. S. Teoh said:

Including yourself? ;-)  (Sorry, couldn't resist...  and now I suppose I'm included as well.)

Talk about vicious circle, eh? And that's why, in my experience, avoiding such discussions in the first place tends to have the best outcome. But I repeat myself.

Generally, the discussions that are actually about music composition (y'know, the whole point of this forum and all that) tend to be OK. It's when it starts veering into less-directly related topics (or tenuously related, or completely unrelated) topics that things start going downhill. And once it devolves, it can never be brought back again.  And the Composers' Forum analogue of Godwin's Law (whatever form it may take) is the inevitable outcome.

RSS

Sign up info

Read before you sign up to find out what the requirements are!

Store

© 2020   Created by Gav Brown.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service