![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
holzman_tweed![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
keturah, welcome to my LiveJournal.I have deleted your comment from my entry celebrating both same-sex marriages in San Francisco and the marriage of that couple. If you have something intelligent to say, by all means go right ahead, you'll have to content yourself with mocking them in your own journal.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-02-17 11:50 am (UTC)While you did not like my flavor of humor, deleting comments that are not totally vile is of weak character, in my opinion.
Thanks.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-17 12:40 pm (UTC)I'm not much of a judge of what's "totally vile," so "sufficiently vile" will have to do as a measuring stick for what doesn't get to stay in my journal. If you think that makes me of weak character, I'm sure I'll find a way to get by without your good opinion.
Fair enough
Date: 2004-02-17 01:31 pm (UTC)C'mon, commenting on the dysfunctional bowels of the onlooker is hardly as bad as "shouting 'fire!' in a crowded theatre." So sensitive!
My latent comment was that politics no matter how social the issue is not really about feelings in the end. And we should keep in that way. The political arena is not the place for that. And this wave of "political correctness" is ridiculous enough.
Re: Fair enough
Date: 2004-02-17 04:18 pm (UTC)Re: Fair enough
Date: 2004-02-17 08:44 pm (UTC)This is not very clearly worded, but let me see if I understand you: Are you saying that the politcal aspects of same-sex marriage (or of issues in general) are separate from their emotional aspects, and that this is proper?
Fine
Date: 2004-02-17 09:13 pm (UTC)He has enabled the commenting option, so he should be prepared for someone to spoil the moment.
So yes, he can delete whatever he likes, but I think that it reflects something about his coping skills.
Re: Fair enough
Date: 2004-02-17 11:12 pm (UTC)In what state of emotional and political degeneration should this marriage receive any more sentiment than any other marriage? And anyway, even if there is something endearing about the way they embrace each other, it is still not quite cute. Puppies and kittens are cute.
Re: Fine
Date: 2004-02-18 05:12 am (UTC)He should not have to cut himself off from people who are not jerks by not enabling comments or making his journal friends only, just so that you don't get to make a comment. It says something good about his coping skills that he does not allow someone like you to shrink him back into that defensive stance. Deleting your post is not about coping badly, it's about making a point, and you well know what that point is. I rather think it says something about your coping skills that you're so wounded by it, and can't let it go.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-18 08:43 am (UTC)You're heartbroken. I can tell.
*snickers*
Re: Fair enough
Date: 2004-02-18 08:29 pm (UTC)That you have to ask this question, I think, demonstrates the problem with your thesis that the political and the emotional can be completely separated from one another, let alone that it should be.
This particular marriage is the first marriage in the United States recognized by any government at all between people of the same sex. That's not merely political, but historic. If that has no emotional impact for you, I don't know what to tell you.
If it's beyond you to grasp that people who have been forbidden to marry ther loved ones are now able to has an emotional as well as political impact on them, I'm boggled at the alienation required for such a loss. I'm not sure how to answer your question because I'm having trouble grasping that it isn't intuitively obvious that this political issue can't help but have an intense emotional component.
Whether or not something is cute is an aesthetic call.