rutro. mikey doesn't like it, after all.
sometimes some of us discuss the political potential of rimming. is that a problem too? what about the fashion disasters of academe and new jersey? or debate Doug's claim, (to paraphrase)that, given capitalism's penchant for ugliness, wearing beautiful fashions is a revolutionary act.
>I accuse all you who are promulgating this "AI" bullshit of this: You like
>to sound like experts about inscrutible topics.
are you really brian siano?
lookey: it's an e-mail discussion list. it's a form of social life. it's like a pub--or maybe it's like the kind of pub some of us wish were available to us. at any rate, the point is that some people are carrying on conversations on topics about which some of know and care nothing--and vice versa. you can denounce them as frivolous, but why? what does it accomplish other than to reinscribe the very divisions that doug would like to see us work through:
"I hope this list will be a forum for speaking across intellectual and social boundaries that have divided the left, such as it is, for too long. Among these oppositions I'd like to see worked through are ones like class/identity, cultural politics/"real" politics, Marxism/postmodernism, universal/particularist, activism/theory, economics/culture, nature/labor; nature/culture, and labor/culture."
maybe i've misunderstood your reasons for finding discussion as Lame Brained Onanists wanting. I apologize if i have. I read you as thinking that certain topics just aren't warranted because they don't seriously address pressing political problems. right?
kelley