>I had not remembered the context of this, but now that I see it it
>is every bit as idiotic and ethically offensive as I remember it as
being.
all of your groaning accusations come down to: 'you generalised'. big deal carrol. why do you generalise, why do we all without you dumping like this every time? and why are you so keen to comment with such a level of hostility to every second post of mine, looking for the opportunity to make a snide remark?
rob wrote:
>And if I've got that right, I haven't a clue where Carrol gets off
with this
>smugly nonsensical little hostility.
and, for the most part i don't see where he can justify his hostility, but then i have to remember that carrol and i actually got along quite well, and agreed on a number of things, until i took him up on his saying that rakesh was not really white because he would not agree with carol's version of anti-racist politics, and i took him up offlist for lecturing me about what it was my DUTY as a non-white, lesbian to do politically. i found his arguments offensive then, and his constant bullying does not compel me to change my mind. i have tried countless times to open up lines of communication with carrol that were not hostile, since i do think he has much to offer, both on and offlist, but he is clearly happy in his chosen role.
i did ask carrol, offlist, at least twice after he had sniped for no apparent reason i could see at other posts of mine on unrelated issues, to either engage in serious conversation about what he saw as problems with my position or else lay off. namely, issues which he did not really take anyone else up on but had obviously decided he would rather play at being my punishing conscience than feel any embarassment at his statements re rakesh and myself.
apologies to those who find this boring, but i find it boring too.
angela