imomus: (Default)
[personal profile] imomus
Completion of this Customer Service Feedback (Flipwhack Metaloop) Poll should take less than five minutes. In accordance with government man-hour waste reduction guidelines, if you can suggest ways in which this poll could be shortened or simplified, please post them line by line to Twitter.



[Poll #1429518]

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 10:35 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kumakouji.livejournal.com
Why do you consider Momus to be more to the right of you?

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 10:59 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
Momus's positions do sometimes mirror right-wing ones. He once approvingly quoted some academic as saying Japan is a fascist country without the nasty bits, or words to that effect. He's not much of a fan of democracy, and seems to think unelected elites would be best running the world. Momus's views on women, by whatever convoluted route he got there, are not so far off a traditionalist's. He has said he doesn't think women should interest themselves in politics or traditional 'male' levers of power, that they gained nothing by getting the right to vote. I can see some parallels not with the laissez-faire capitalism that has been in vogue until recently, but with an earlier more authoritarian form of right-wingery.

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 11:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kumakouji.livejournal.com
Surely Authoritarianism is only right-wing if the Authority in charge is right-wing.

"and seems to think unelected elites would be best running the world"

But he wants left-wing elites to do that, hence why I see his views as far-left.

"He has said he doesn't think women should interest themselves in politics or traditional 'male' levers of power, that they gained nothing by getting the right to vote."

I didn't know he actually thought this, but yes, that's a very conservative standpoint.

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 11:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] imomus.livejournal.com
He has said he doesn't think women should interest themselves in politics or traditional 'male' levers of power, that they gained nothing by getting the right to vote.

Quotes? Sources? Have I ever said this? Where?

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 12:22 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] imomus.livejournal.com
Click Opera endorsed Ségolène Royal at the last French presidential election (though not Angela Merkel, too free-market, and not Hillary Clinton, too desperate), Irina Hakamada (http://imomus.livejournal.com/15340.html) as president of Russia (despite her free market stance), and approved (twice!) the fact that the Chinese banking system is run by the "three Xiaos" (http://imomus.livejournal.com/15340.html), three powerful women.
Edited Date: 2009-07-14 12:23 pm (UTC)

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 06:40 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
In this thread:

http://imomus.livejournal.com/356429.html

someone directly asks you this question:

if you were around 100 years ago, would you have supported the Suffragettes? Do you think that anything they gained, such as the right to vote or sit in parliament, has merely perpetuated women's perceived weaknesses?

Your windy response can be summed up as "no".

You're a gender essentialist, as is clear in this thread:

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=40&threadid=46954

where you accuse a movie of bad faith because it shows Jodie Foster as an engineer, which you say is "was a lie, a lie about women." because women, in reality, are no good with technical things.

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 07:10 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
wow, what a square. must be a generational thing.

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 11:41 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] imomus.livejournal.com
Your windy response can be summed up as "no".

Um, no it can't. I called the campaign for female suffrage "laudable" but said that it was only half the battle:

"Let me put it this way. If we imagine a world where only women have the vote, do men want it too? Or do they stigmatize voting and try to organize the world in smoke-filled back rooms instead (while perhaps arranging votes as a figleaf, Putin-style)?

"I find it very interesting that Adam Curtis, in Century of the Self, shows that, during the laudable struggle of women to get the right to endorse the careers of men via the ballot box and use of "something women don't have" (the vote), showed a parallel development: the first successful PR campaign, devised by Freud's nephew, to get women to smoke. The cigarette was marketed to them as.... well, something else only men have.

"I'm personally waiting for things that only women have to become the root of marketing strategy before I call the gender war for the women."

Re: The structure of seeming.

Date: 2009-07-14 04:30 pm (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
from the limited options, I was forced to choose "to the right" but I feel it would be more correct to say that I am usually just above momus, floating over his head like a tarnished halo, and many times I am beneath him, like a cockroach scuttling behind the refigerator. Somedays I am in front of momus, like a golden thread running out across the blue hills, fading into a hazy green and silver sunset.

Profile

imomus: (Default)
imomus

February 2010

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28      

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags