Takin' Out the Trash: My First Two Scalps, My Crusade Against Porn Fan-Boi Spam at Wikipedia Options

[Emperor]

Yikes.

[Somey]

Golly!

Well, if it is him, at least he doesn't seem to be singling out Jewish porn actresses. That might tend to suggest he's grown up a bit in the last ten years or so...

[Peter Damian]

Hey, you're this Kevin O'Keefe, aren't you?

Are you?

[KevinOKeeffe]

So you hate all whores individually?

My feelings with regard to individual whores seldom rises to the intensity of hatred. I seldom know enough about them to know whether pity, aloof disdain, or frothing hatred is the correct response; I'm sure all three have their place in various individual instances. I do hate the idea of someone becoming a whore, however. Even in instances where it makes sense for them to do so ie., in order to avoid starvation in a war zone, say, its still very regrettable that such things occur.

[Sarcasticidealist]

Are you?

They have the same middle name and, as has been pointed out here already, "our" Kevin believes that "anti-semitism is part and parcel to informed patriotism". So I'm thinking yes.

[KevinOKeeffe]

Golly!

Well, if it is him, at least he doesn't seem to be singling out Jewish porn actresses. That might tend to suggest he's grown up a bit in the last ten years or so...

What can I say? During the 1990s, I was a pretty disturbed guy, due at least in part to a lifelong, untreated case of Bipolar Disorder, and I did a stupid, fucked-up thing. While I may adhere to a number of controversial socio-political notions (although there's probably more of Ignatius J. Riley in me than Julius Streicher), I do not actually hate people based solely on their membership in a particular racial, ethnic, and/or religious class. And like many people, that has not always been true about me. Unlike most other people who used to hate people on the basis of such criteria, I have the unfortunate burden of an evidentiary paper trail, cataloging my past foolishness in the local newspapers. Whereas most people simply have the luxury of lying about their past idiocy, if they are so inclined. And while I no longer hate people for being Jewish, I did not subsequently decide it was a good idea to become an adherent to orthodox socio-political thought. When I became a National Socialist ("Nazi") in 1996, I did so because of my awareness that this society is on an extremely deleterious trajectory. I don't think that has changed; we are still plunging towards an abyss. I simply don't think targeting people on the basis of their demographic make-up is a very good way to avert the disasters which surely await the USA in the decades to come, if our national trajectory is not altered.

[Peter Damian]

Golly!

Well, if it is him, at least he doesn't seem to be singling out Jewish porn actresses. That might tend to suggest he's grown up a bit in the last ten years or so...

What can I say? During the 1990s, I was a pretty disturbed guy, due at least in part to a lifelong, untreated case of Bipolar Disorder, and I did a stupid, fucked-up thing. While I may adhere to a number of controversial socio-political notions (although there's probably more of Ignatius J. Riley in me than Julius Streicher), I do not actually hate people based solely on their membership in a particular racial, ethnic, and/or religious class. And like many people, that has not always been true about me. Unlike most other people who used to hate people on the basis of such criteria, I have the unfortunate burden of an evidentiary paper trail, cataloging my past foolishness in the local newspapers. Whereas most people simply have the luxury of lying about their past idiocy, if they are so inclined. And while I no longer hate people for being Jewish, I did not subsequently decide it was a good idea to become an adherent to orthodox socio-political thought. When I became a National Socialist ("Nazi") in 1996, I did so because of my awareness that this society is on an extremely deleterious trajectory. I don't think that has changed; we are still plunging towards an abyss. I simply don't think targeting people on the basis of their demographic make-up is a very good way to avert the disasters which surely await the USA in the decades to come, if our national trajectory is not altered.

Unfortunately some stupid, fucked-up things are harder to erase when it comes to pressing the 'reset' button. I appreciate your honest and candid response though.

Ignatius Jacques Reilly is something of a modern Don Quixote — eccentric, idealistic, and creative, sometimes to the point of delusion. In his foreword to the book, Walker Percy describes Ignatius as a "slob extraordinary, a mad Oliver Hardy, a fat Don Quixote, a perverse Thomas Aquinas rolled into one." He disdains modernity, particularly pop culture. The disdain becomes his obsession: he goes to movies in order to mock their perversity and express his outrage with the contemporary world's lack of "theology and geometry." He prefers the scholastic philosophy of the Middle Ages, and the Early Medieval philosopher Boethius in particular.

I'm with you there.



This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sun 2nd August 2009, 8:15am

[Moulton]

My feelings with regard to individual whores seldom rises to the intensity of hatred. I seldom know enough about them to know whether pity, aloof disdain, or frothing hatred is the correct response; I'm sure all three have their place in various individual instances. I do hate the idea of someone becoming a whore, however. Even in instances where it makes sense for them to do so ie., in order to avoid starvation in a war zone, say, its still very regrettable that such things occur.

Nobody responded to my suggestion to examine the case of Dulcinea, the fictional heroine of Don Quixote. Her character is an iconic example of the dilemma which Kevin contemplates above.

But perhaps a more fascinating case would be Sabina Spielrein, a real person whose story is even more interesting than that of the fictional Dulcinea.

When Carl Jung was just starting his career under the supervision of Eugen Bleuler, Spielrein was his first patient. She was a teenager whom he diagnosed and treated for hysteria. Spielrein stayed on at the clinic and became Jung's assistant and lover. Their dalliance became a scandal that came to the attention of both Freud and Bleuler, leading to the dismissal of Jung from his position at Bleuler's clinic.

Spielrein stayed on to study under Bleuler and then launched her own career in psychotherapy. Her first client was Jean Piaget, with whom she subsequently collaborated and published pathbreaking papers on Autism.

The diagnosis of Autism originated when Bleuler and Freud first discussed such cases. Bleuler proposed to call the diagnosis "ipsism". Freud proposed calling it "autoerotism". Bleuler decided to elide the express reference to erotic self-stimulation, and shortened the name to autism. That was around 1912, when Spielrein was still studying under Bleuler after her dalliance with Jung.

So, what does this have to do with sex for sale?

Think about it. Where is one's source of sexual gratification? Erotic self-stimulation? From a "hired-hand"? From a lover? From a spouse? From printed or online pornography or japornimation?

The prostitute with a heart of gold is something of a literary cliche. Having a "heart of gold" is a synonym for having empathy for others. Autism, on the other hand, is a diagnosis in which the absence of empathy is a defining characteristic. So how does one convey empathy to someone who is 1) desperately lacking in sources of sexual gratification and 2) very much in need of exemplars in empathy?

Enter the role of the sex worker. Is a sex worker a despicable harlot or a praiseworthy therapist?

Deciding whether to curse with contempt or praise with respect is clearly a significant emotional choice.

But emotional choices are often ill-informed choices.

If you study the biography of Sabina Speilrein, you might come away with a more mature perspective on a subtle and complex issue — one that perplexed and confounded Freud, Jung, Bleuler, and Piaget.

By the way, her surname means "fair play".

It's ironic, because Spielrein's life was anything but fair.

[GlassBeadGame]

Golly!

Well, if it is him, at least he doesn't seem to be singling out Jewish porn actresses. That might tend to suggest he's grown up a bit in the last ten years or so...

What can I say? During the 1990s, I was a pretty disturbed guy, due at least in part to a lifelong, untreated case of Bipolar Disorder, and I did a stupid, fucked-up thing. While I may adhere to a number of controversial socio-political notions (although there's probably more of Ignatius J. Riley in me than Julius Streicher), I do not actually hate people based solely on their membership in a particular racial, ethnic, and/or religious class. And like many people, that has not always been true about me. Unlike most other people who used to hate people on the basis of such criteria, I have the unfortunate burden of an evidentiary paper trail, cataloging my past foolishness in the local newspapers. Whereas most people simply have the luxury of lying about their past idiocy, if they are so inclined. And while I no longer hate people for being Jewish, I did not subsequently decide it was a good idea to become an adherent to orthodox socio-political thought. When I became a National Socialist ("Nazi") in 1996, I did so because of my awareness that this society is on an extremely deleterious trajectory. I don't think that has changed; we are still plunging towards an abyss. I simply don't think targeting people on the basis of their demographic make-up is a very good way to avert the disasters which surely await the USA in the decades to come, if our national trajectory is not altered.

Your hate directed toward the JCC was 1999 and at that time you immediately tried to tender an "apology" which your victims found self-serving and insincere. Maybe not so much has changed.

[Peter Damian]

Nobody responded to my suggestion

Why was this do you think?

[Moulton]

Nobody responded to my suggestion

Why was this do you think?

The overwhelming evidence is that most people on the planet are not particularly motivated to think very deeply about much of anything, let alone write a brief essay on a subject of intellectual depth.

It's so much easier just to glide past these things, or blithely dismiss the thoughtful work of others as incomprehensible nonsense or utter bollocks.

[Peter Damian]

The overwhelming evidence is that most people on the planet are not particularly motivated to think very deeply about much of anything, let alone write a brief essay on a subject of intellectual depth.

Why are you posting here then?

[Moulton]

The overwhelming evidence is that most people on the planet are not particularly motivated to think very deeply about much of anything, let alone write a brief essay on a subject of intellectual depth.

Why are you posting here then?

I'm just killing time until I regain enough Energy Points to complete another job in Mafia Wars.

[Somey]

And while I no longer hate people for being Jewish, I did not subsequently decide it was a good idea to become an adherent to orthodox socio-political thought.

Meaning what, that you just have a sort of vague feeling of unease about them now, maybe?

Just bear in mind that anti-semitism is one of those things we're very sensitive about here on WR... That doesn't mean we ban all such folks on sight or anything, but I'm afraid it does mean the pretext threshold is much lower.

When I became a National Socialist ("Nazi") in 1996, I did so because of my awareness that this society is on an extremely deleterious trajectory. I don't think that has changed; we are still plunging towards an abyss.

That makes no sense - to support Nazism in the face of a "deleterious national trajectory" is like making a parachute with fishnet stockings and Swiss cheese. Then again, I guess I don't really want to debate the evils of fascism with anybody... Hopefully you're not still a member!

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

How is "a man who forms an emotional attachment to porn stars he's never met" any different from a fan of Mariah Carey, Derek Jeter or Bill O'Reilly

Well, actually, I am fairly confident to say that none of my male friends masturbate on a regular basis imaging Bill O'Reilly's genitals stuck in their face ... although Derek Jeter probably does pick up a few closeted fantasies. So, yes, there is a difference.

Wikipedia has caused significant problems already in education as most teachers will tell you. The Scottish Parent Teacher Council denounced Wikipedia last year and blamed it for falling grades ...

Yup ... probably caused by all the additional fapping it causes in adolescent boys.

In the old days, all it took was for one reprobate to tear the line drawing of a vagina out of the Encyclopedia Britannica and the rest of the school was screwed for 10 years until the next edition came out. Why, a boy could finish his education during that time and never know what one looked like.

Nowadays that are pages full of them on the Pee-dia ... shaved ones, hairy ones, black ones, white ones, pierced ones, cock and spunk filled ones, from the front, from the back, you name it, they've got it covered ... or rather uncovered ... and all for easy downloading to one hard disk and sharing, printing or tugging off.

A new survey really out to be commissioned amongst the young men of today ... have you ever had, or do you know anyone who has had, a tug to something you have seen or read on the Pee-dia?

Why ... it probably is "a Zionist-sympathizer/One World Government conspiracy to sap the moral fortitude of our young men, confuse their minds with garbage and offend our sisterhood".

This post has been edited by Cock-up-over-conspiracy: Mon 3rd August 2009, 1:29am

[A Horse With No Name]

I am curious: The Three Stooges were Jewish. Does that mean Kev hates The Three Stooges?

[Somey]

I am curious: The Three Stooges were Jewish. Does that mean Kev hates The Three Stooges?

That could be a problem. And the Marx Brothers too!

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

Well, if it is him, at least he doesn't seem to be singling out Jewish porn actresses. That might tend to suggest he's grown up a bit in the last ten years or so...

m.
Surely, if that was his agenda, it would prove more of a point to leave all the Jewish domination of the pornography industry IN the Pee-dia rather than remove it?

This is a interesting issue ... but I think the guy is right for wanting to remove all the junk. Very, many respectable and small 'c' conservative family people would entirely agree with him. Perhaps the ruckus as he attempts to do so will provide drama enough to have the issue address? Have you checked out the ridiculousness of some of those hoes BLPs?

Worst case scenario, it is a "your enemies' enemies are your friends" time, folks.

I suppose we should just stop the argument here and ask Jimbo's "poor starving African girl" for whom all this "knowledge" in Wikipedia is really meant for ... and ask whether or not she thinks it is going to help her "save the world" or not?

[Somey]

Surely, if that was his agenda, it would prove more of a point to leave all the Jewish domination of the pornography industry IN the Pee-dia rather than remove it?

This is a interesting issue ... but I think the guy is right for wanting to remove all the junk. Very, many respectable and small 'c' conservative family people would entirely agree with him. Perhaps the ruckus as he attempts to do so will provide drama enough to have the issue address? Have you checked out the ridiculousness of some of those hoes BLPs?

Well, two or three I suppose. But I see this as just another example of reverse double-bind thinking - remember that from their (WP's) perspective, information about pornography is a feature of the website, in that it brings in more people than it repels. "Drama" regarding pornography is even better, so Mr. O'Keefe here is allowed to create some - it's win-win, as far as they're concerned. Ultimately, he might succeed in getting one or two porn-actress BLP's deleted, but given his personal history, this will be interpreted by interested/established WP'ers as an attempt to impose fascistic censorship, etc., etc., etc., and the overall effort will be not only rejected, but used as a justification for further enshrinement of whatever "notability guideline" allows such articles to exist. And of course, more drama will ensue, which is the real point of all this (again, from the WP perspective).

I suppose we should just stop the argument here and ask Jimbo's "poor starving African girl" for whom all this "knowledge" in Wikipedia is really meant for ... and ask whether or not she thinks it is going to help her "save the world" or not?

Interesting question - it depends on how you define "children," doesn't it? Starving or not, African male children over the age of, say, 14 or 15 presumably have as much need for pornography as anyone else.

[KevinOKeeffe]

Your hate directed toward the JCC was 1999 and at that time you immediately tried to tender an "apology" which your victims found self-serving and insincere. Maybe not so much has changed.

You are mistaken. I never issued any apology to the Albert L. Schultz Jewish Community Center in Palo Alto, California. After they called a public rally, complete with Joan Baez publicly denouncing me, I deemed our accounts in balance.

In any event, I have been repeatedly denounced for refusing to embrace White Nationalism, by people who's opinions are of more interest to me than yours (by simple virtue of the fact that I am much better acquainted with them), even if I do remain a radical rightist on various issues on socio-political controversy. In our society, many former neo-Nazis and the like suddenly turn 180 degrees and become liberals. I leave it to the reader to decide which is more likely to be sincere, the former neo-Nazi who wakes up one day and declares "Multiculturalism is actually a GREAT idea!," or the one who has simply altered his worldview to some significant extent over the passage of years, but remains an adherent to opinions still deemed unfashionable by the dominant majority.

Nobody responded to my suggestion

Why was this do you think?

The overwhelming evidence is that most people on the planet are not particularly motivated to think very deeply about much of anything, let alone write a brief essay on a subject of intellectual depth.

It's so much easier just to glide past these things, or blithely dismiss the thoughtful work of others as incomprehensible nonsense or utter bollocks.

Well, for the record, I've never read Don Quixote, and thus wasn't under the impression my opinions about it would contain any great insight.