 |
 |
As you say, Sean, you were not alone in feeling aggrieved by that inflamed argument. Can we just leave it and move on? Jamie > On 12 Feb 2018, at 19:03, Sean Carey <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > to me Jamie and never will be. There are successful poets and unsuccessful poets and I accept my minor role. But to decide to become my shrink went away beyond civil discourse as well as the silence is golden brigade. They happily promote their publications or events but are unable to utter a word. > > The fact Alison left and Jimmy C and Rachel W was not a case of being offended but a total misreading of term used in a debate. Indeed if anyone had reason to be upset with me it was Jamie McK he showed graciousness not slogans. Note Jimmy was a male Jaime so no ‘sexism’ was involved or intended and all have prospered on Leeside. > > You in no way were involved Jaime so no problem whatsoever & I enjoy your posts. If female poets decide not to post it is their choice but it is a pity. > > Alison was no shrinking violet with me nor Jimmy or Rachel who got in their digs with relish. Nor am I a sour grapes left outside the railings writer with a grudge. Exclusion is exclusion in any area of life and Sound Eye excelled at it. What is amusing is that the head man claims to be ‘a socialist’ and others are ‘Green’ lovers of nature. Their brand of politics is Interventionist with views on every nation on the planet but on Irish issues they just follow prevailing trends. > > Thus my view that the ‘Alison left because of male bullies’ holds no water. I see no mention of Rachel or Jimmy leaving but Alison has more kudos. > > Cheers > sc > "half of the time we're gone & we don't know where" > The Only Living Boy In New York > Paul Simon > > On Monday, 12 February 2018, Jaime Robles <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Sorry you felt attacked, Sean. I didn’t read that exchange between you and Alison. However, I’m having trouble understanding some of what you have written, which seems odd because, what I’ve read of your previous posts, you are usually very clear. Not sure who the minor poets or the great and the good are. Clearly, I have missed a specific argument. Be that as it may, I can only clarify what I have said. > > And as to what I said: I merely pointed out that Alison had left, and the reasons she gave; I didn’t say she was an angel, did I? Nor did I defend her. > > But what you write affirms the point I was trying to make: that civility helps in discussion. Regardless of contributor, their sex or their affiliation. And that is the only point I am trying to make. > > Is it possible to leave it at that? > > J > > > jaimerobles.com > > > > > ______________________________ > > QS: Let’s return to poetics. > JR: When did we leave? > > —From the conversation between Quinta Slef and Joan Retallack, The Poethical Wager > > > > > > On Feb 12, 2018, at 10:09 AM, Sean Carey <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Please read the context and the savage attack Alison made on yours truly then the similar cohoots attacks by Jimmy Cummins and Rachel Warriner. They went away beyond anything David Lace has said in recent times so let’s not assume Alison Croggan is an angel? None of these three individuals would dare attack a luminary only a man of no property or capital. > > Healthy robust debate is only verbal but Alison crossed a line yet very few on this list had the courage to tackle such disrespect. To go to being my shrink was a total insult given that Alison know nothing about me. Jimmy and Rachel were only following the Joycean T line given his guru status with them. > > Lesson DO NOT JUMP TO DEFEND THOSE WHO ABUSE minor writers but swarm to adore the great and the good. You are not alone in using Alison as an example of why females do not contribute on here. > > They contribute simply because they do not want to with rare exceptions of course but it is by no means a tough list. Many women are on Twitter which is a far tougher often brutal ‘vomitoriam’. > > Yours In Solidality For Fair Speech > > Sean > > > > "half of the time we're gone & we don't know where" > The Only Living Boy In New York > Paul Simon > > On Monday, 12 February 2018, Jaime Robles <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > As you may note: Alison Croggan left the list. And she left because of the futility and pervasiveness of bloodymindedness, which is not robust discussion. > > > > > > > On Feb 12, 2018, at 8:28 AM, David Lace <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > The only problem with trying to avoid offending people’s sensibilities in discussions is that often people attribute offence where none is intended. And also people can take offence simply with one disagreeing with them. It’s hard to avoid such tempestuousness at times. > > My worry is that the political correctness that has created “no-platforming” and intellectual “safe spaces” could infiltrate poetic discussion lists like this one. > > It is very easy for robust discussions to be used as a pretext to explain why some women don’t take part in them. Perhaps those women (like some men) simply don’t feel comfortable having their opinions challenged, and so don’t take part. > > I don’t think robust discussions are necessarily the sole preserve of men here. As I said Alison Croggan was a robust debater (too robust for some, I expect). I hope this list doesn’t become a self-flagellation watering hole for “emasculated” and “feminised” males. > > > > > > > —————————original message———————- > > Jamie McKendrick wrote; > > No apologies necessary, but thanks for thinking over what I said. > > As for robust debate, I feel that’s fine here and no one minds it. But for all of us the conversation’s more informative and fun if it doesn’t get bogged down in the inconsequential or descend to personal animosity or point-scoring. > I do believe that many people, and not only women, have found the often irate mode of discussion on this list off-putting which is a shame because many other postings seem to me thought-provoking and enlightening. > Regarding what Tim said about the misattribution of views and motives, I also very much feel that it hampers things considerably. It shuts down the space for explorative or tentative or speculative thinking. Which poetry should surely be encouraging. > Jamie > >