I received an email from She of all Things GV Blog, stating the following:

“I saw the comment below, and wanted to check in with you about it. My initial thought is to not publish it, and for me to contact the person. However, as it is your post, you might want to respond to them as well, or, you may even want to publish the comment and respond to them publicly. I’ll leave it up to you.

“Comment: I really hate when you blog. Your entries are always much too long and rambly, have nothing to do with sex positivity or anything educational. I miss all the old writers who actually knew what sex positivity was all about and also had a point.”

While my initial reaction to this comment was to agree with She of All Things GV Blog, that is, honestly, the diplomat in me talking.  I am in complete agreement with the idea of respectful dialog, and that in the end, fueling a fire of negative feedback usually does more harm than good.

However…

While I may be a lot of things - apparently long winded, rambly, ignorant and aimless being among them - I am also a philosopher and a writer (which sort of explains the long-winded, rambly, ignorant and aimless, I suppose).  As a philosopher, I adhere to the ideas of free thought and as a writer I uphold  the tenets of the first amendment. Free Speech, Without exception. 

And while I may not agree with what you say, I agree that you have the right to say it.

That being said…

I am not some egomaniacal hothouse flower that expects everyone to tell me how great I am every moment of every day (because that would be boring). I actively invite and welcome criticism and dialogue.  I DO, however,  have a litmus test that negative comments should ideally pass before qualifying as legitimate criticism. They are as follows:

1) Basis in objective fact
2) Following an objective pattern of reasoning.
3) Proof of failure to meet my stated objective.

Which brings me to the comment at hand.   Seperate the opinion from the elements of the comment intended to be criticism, and what we have is as follows:

1) “Your entries…have nothing to do with Sex Positivity or anything Educational”
2) “The old writers…actually knew what Sex Positvity was all about” and the implication that I do not.
3) “…And also had a point.”

Duly noted.  Subsequently responded:

1) and 2) What is Sex Positive?

While Wikipedia is not the standard repository for all knowledge and wisdom in the Universe, after checking in with my sources, they are in agreement that the following entry in Wiki is a pretty spot-on assessment of Sex Positive:

“The sex-positive movement is a loosely defined term that applies to a wide variety of elements that embrace social and philosophical attitudes promoting open sexuality with few limits.”

For those of you who have been following along since the beginning, in my first entry into the world of GV blogging, I stated the following:

“…there is no way for me to tell you what this blog is about. I can, however, tell you that… the thought that comes to mind is this: How do I apply my tendency to probe for the lofty and often hidden philosophical nature of things to something as visceral and raw as sexuality in its myriad forms of expression?” (Nov. 6, 2007)

Seems that there is a parallel or two between Wiki’s definition and my “Statement of Lack of Purpose” that suggest that I may in fact know a thing or three about Sex Positive - I just choose to explore it here in a different way. 

Which is, perhaps, why they invited me to do so in the first place…

3) and a little bit of 1) - Pointless Education

While I am in wholehearted agreement with my critic that there is absolutely no point to my writings, the lack of a point IS the objective.  As my above quote indicates, I very clearly stated from the beginning that my blogging has no point, plan or purpose.  My writings in general are a meandering, a wander through the Philosophy of Stuff.  In this specific case, Sex and Relationship and People Stuff. I do not write for the sake of drawing conclusions, I write for the sake of presenting ideas.  If I had a point, it would be a bit too much like telling a person what they should think, rather than suggesting a different way of thinking about things.

(The latter of which is pretty much the definition of Educate, by the way.)

So, while my thoughts may not meet my critics’ definition of Sex Positive Education…that does not necessarily mean they do not meet A definition of Sex Positive Education. And it certainly doesn’t mean that my thoughts are not keeping with the spirit that the other GV writers, past and current, embody -  respectful dialog about challenging accepted views to promote greater, unlimited understanding and expression, sexual or otherwise.

Or, in the vernacular - social evolution and individual growth.

So, while the comment offered fails the litmus test of criticism, it is an opinion, and everyone is entitled to them.  If in your opinion, my stream of thought style of purposeless writing does not appeal to you, its all good, you are neither the first or only person with that opinion.  Feel free to do what most of them do - ignore me.  There is LOADS of good stuff abounding here on the GV blogs check out.  And plenty of room for differing styles and opinions.
 
And while I consider myself truly complimented that my writing moves people to such a strong of an emotional reaction as hate, if your opinions on my musings distract from the ideals that GV is trying to promote, shoot me an email, and keep it off the list. We are all guests on the GV playground - let’s play nice.

My thanks to She of All Things GV Blog for giving me the chance to respond to this as I saw fit.  Most people who know me better wouldn’t. 

Cheers,

Harlequinn

Recently:

No related posts