Hitchens on single standards

[ravi]

kelley at pulpculture.org wrote:
>>
>> quite true, but i was responding to jks, not directly to dp. since jks
>> did not include anything more than the above from dennis, and since i
>> trust jks' logical completeness, i explicitly stated that *if* the
>> choice is between the two positions, *then* i fall on the side of the
>> malignant fucks.
> 
> irrelevant. in a defensive posture designed to turn your opponents into
> your own version of a "malignant fuck" (without typing the phrase) you
> responded to your ally in the debate and changed the terms of the
> discussion to the either/or YOU prefer, that one that makes YOU look
> best, and makes YOUR answer easy. It is not the more nuanced discussion
> that might have been had. And, this is precisely the reason why this
> debate gets fucked so quickly.
> 

look, i said i am not the brightest bulb around here, but in the picture
you paint above of me, i emerge quite a devious and wickedly clever
character. since the latter is aesthetically preferable, i'll be glad to
let your psychoanalysis stick and just mention this: the *if* does
exactly the opposite of what you suggest. your analysis rests on the
handwaving about my "defensive posture", my "opponents" and "allies".
very nuanced! ;-)

	--ravi