Star Foster, the Great Lady of the Pagan Portal over at Patheos.com, has taken a blogging sabbatical as of a few days ago. You should go and read her explanation of why this is, because it is eye-opening, and profoundly disturbing…at least from my viewpoint.
I know that some people don’t like Star or the work that she’s been doing. I have always found her to be very open, friendly, receptive, and delightful to work with, and I try and tell her this as often as possible–I am someone who tries to appreciate the people in my life whenever and however possible, but most generally through words of appreciation and encouragement. No, I don’t entirely agree with her on every possible theological or sociological point, and in fact I’ve had some good fodder for my own reflections here based on things that she’s written with which I’ve disagreed; but, it has never been my intention to ridicule or demean her in my critical responses on various topics–and, unfortunately, I might be in the minority in that approach, as far too many people go right to the personal insults and ad hominem attacks when things like this are concerned…and, because it’s “the internet,” and it is a lot more disembodied and de-personalized a medium of interaction, people are all the more likely to be mean, petty, and abusive because they don’t see the person on the other end as anything more important or worthy of regard as any number of Little Goombas on Super Mario Brothers, who are there to be flattened and forgotten. But, I digress…
Let me just say right here that Star Foster has built the Patheos.com Pagan Portal up from–quite literally–nothing, and has recruited a diverse group of bloggers from all across the various modern pagan spectra (and, note, there’s more than one “spectrum” in modern paganism!). She did such a good job with it that Jason Pitzl-Waters eventually moved The Wild Hunt Blog over to Patheos.com when things weren’t going very well on a technical/practical level for his very important work. That, dear friends, speaks volumes on its own. And if the litany of other major modern pagan worthies who contribute to the Pagan Portal needs to be selectively stated as further evidence, I offer you two names: Gus diZerega and T. Thorn Coyle, two individuals who produce high-quality work on a consistent basis, and who do not waste their time nor suffer fools gladly. Star deserves a great deal of appreciation and acknowledgement for this, as well as thanks…
But she does not deserve nor warrant death-threats–no one does under any circumstances!–and she does not deserve nor warrant people critiquing her personally or physically or in any other manner in blog comments or private e-mails. And, really, no one does.
If someone has a problem with something someone has stated, it is perfectly possible to calmly and rationally disagree with the person in question, and phrase one’s disagreements with civility and moderation. The other person is under no obligation to change their mind because you disagree with them, and if they continue to disagree, they can do so in a manner that does not demean the other person. Simply saying “I appreciate your input, but I can’t agree with that” is enough in most cases. However, it is rare to stick with that…and, I know I’ve screwed up in this regard on many occasions, but I’m at least trying very damn hard to maintain a level of civility in my discourse at all times.
And, I think I do a pretty good job of it, most of the time.
However, here’s my question. I’ve been writing this blog since August of 2010, and I’ve written more than 800 posts. I often do blog posts several times a day, to the point that some people have complained that I’m overwhelming them with stuff to read. (Well, you don’t have to read it if you don’t want to!) But, the majority of comments on my blog aren’t actual comments by other humans who have read my blog, they’re links that I’ve made back to earlier posts I’ve done, etc. They’re the cross-references in this particular corner of the worldwide web, which makes this section of the web especially densely packed with the spider-filaments of my own web patterning…but, again, I digress!
Both in the “Queer I Stand” column (and elsewhere) at Patheos.com’s Pagan Portal, I don’t get a ton of comments. I have had a few columns over there that have had some really good attention and have generated a bit of very useful discussion, and I’m grateful for those. When The Wild Hunt links to something I’ve written here, I tend to get a big spike in readership for a day or two, and those kinds of occurrences have accounted for most of my largest number of blog hits days in the nearly two years that I’ve been doing this. On average these days, I get around 200 hits a day–sometimes more, sometimes less–and often that is before I have posted my latest entry for a day (as that may not come until the last quarter of the day). I have rarely had more than 20 spam comments in a day either. So, while all of these numbers could be better (more hits, less spam), that’s not my main concern at present.
What I’m concerned about is when I’ve read things by Star (and others) that people are so totally un-civil and are so poorly behaved in comments and in private e-mails as to demean a blog author personally or to give them death-threats. All of the death-threats I’ve had in my life (and I’ve had several) have not been due to blogging.
And, as far as arguments and such go on blogs and over at Patheos.com in my various writing activities there, about the worst I’ve had on a scale of one to ten (with one being “OMG I luv u n I totally agree! <3 <3 <3" and ten being "shut the fuck up you twisted fat bald hermaphrodite freak, why don't you die") is a three-point-five to a four, at very worst, which is pretty much "disagreeing, but not strongly enough to be overly argumentative."
While that's the level of discourse that I would prefer to keep things at (I'd think of anything over "five" on this scale as being in the realm of moving less from a point of disagreement and more from a position of insulting the other person in various ways), I really have to wonder: am I either doing something so right here (and there) that I'm not attracting that kind of negative attention, or I'm maintaining discourse at a level that puts off potential negative commenters from responding; or, am I doing something entirely wrong here and there such that I'm not creating any controversy and the things I'm talking about are so irrelevant that no one cares to comment on them?
Yes, of course, I realize that the overall project of the present blog is a lot less widely appealing and is much more niche in its primary interests–Antinous and the deities and divine figures related to him, and the customs, texts, theologies, and practices that have existed or are coming into being for that purpose–than many other modern pagan blogs happen to be. However, I have dealt with a number of theological topics that are much more wide-ranging than that–and, in fact, it is those posts that tend to draw the most hits, the most links from elsewhere, and the most comments. But, even there, things remain pretty civil.
I'm finding myself in the odd position that the lack of scandal with my present blogging may be a negative thing, in a very twisted and strange way! What would Sanctus Oscar Wilde say about this, for example–is it good that when I do draw any wider attention, it tends to be relatively good attention? I’m also reminded of what, if I recall correctly, Raven Kaldera has been quoted as having said: “‘Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.” I am left to assume, therefore, that either I’ve never blown a mind with the present blog, or that the minds which are so blown after reading it are in a state of not being able to respond at all because they’ve been turned into mush…!?!
As a heavily Hermes-influenced person, communication is a really key element to a lot of my work in every aspect of my spiritual practice. However, I’ve got no small amount of Dionysos in my life either, and as a result, I am also aware that what I’m doing here is not just communication, it’s performance–I’m playing the role of Doctor, and I should play it as well as possible. As I am also the more conventional and pedestrian form of “Dr.” as a means of livelihood–which is to say, a college professor–I always worry when I’m in front of a class and no one seems to be responding to what I’m saying, and when I say “Does anyone have anything to add or discuss?” and I get the “Bueller?” response, I worry that I’m not doing my job correctly. No performer likes to go out on stage and do their best, and then have the audience be silent and not drown out the chirping crickets that are miles away–one hopes for applause, though often one gets boos, and sometimes one gets a mix of those two things.
Don’t misunderstand me–I’m not asking for a few negative comments just to even things out, or to just have some random death-threats just to make me feel like I’m actually doing something useful or important in the world (and, seriously, if you think death-threats are a joke, you can stop reading right now and go and do something else for a very long time, please!); I’m simply wondering if there is something structurally or atmospherically that has made people less likely to comment here, or if there is something structural or atmospheric about the writing on this blog that simply brings the best out in people. If I were to adjust the atmosphere to generate more comments and discussion, or heighten it to make the discourse that does happen here that much more civil and positive, what would be the key things to which attention should be paid in order to do that?
Your comments, as ever, are greatly appreciated and highly valued!
One thing you are doing that’s different: blogging while presumed male.
Author John Scalzi wrote about this a while back in this post: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2011/08/31/the-sort-of-crap-i-dont-get/
By: Dw3t-Hthr on April 11, 2012
at 3:34 pm
ALthough, that makes me think people really aren’t read this blog very carefully at all…especially with what I’ve written about the Tetrad more recently, etc.
By: aediculaantinoi on April 11, 2012
at 5:59 pm
To be fair, in generalpeople don’t take non-binary genderhood seriously at al —hell, TS people with relatively binary identities get taken more seriously– and so even if they’re paying attention, a lot of people are likely to assume any non-binary gender identity from an apparently cissexual male/AMAB person who’s non-transitioning is just just a vie for attention, id est to appear “edgy” and as if you somehow actually understand the plight of “real trans people”.
Keep in mind, this is not my opinion, but a general opinion I’ve noticed with the population at large.
By: Ruadhán on April 23, 2012
at 2:47 am
I’m not familiar with the acronym “AMAB”: could you elaborate that?
As for people’s general opinions: indeed, I’ve heard that before, and I’ve been told by almost everyone who I’ve talked about my gender identity with that it’s an illusion, it’s crazy, it’s stupid, it’s far from the truth, and the truth is…yeah. I only know my own experience, and every time I’ve tried to either be one gender or the other of the two conventional ones, I’ve been told that I’m not doing it right and that I’m “not really it”; now that I have a gender identity that I like and that fits me and that I’m happy to call my own, I get told it doesn’t exist and I’m deluding myself. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who doesn’t respect or accept my gender identity verbally can take a flying leap for all I care; but, if they shut up about their refusal or lack of ability to understand it, they can think whatever they want, because no one really cares or can hear/know what they think. You know the drill…
By: aediculaantinoi on April 24, 2012
at 12:31 am
AMAB = Assigned Male At Birth.
By: Ruadhán on April 24, 2012
at 1:49 am
Got it–thanks!
And, I suppose that’s the bit that makes me go “huh?” Doctors assign people male (or female) at birth all the time and are wrong…so, it’s not just a matter of flipping a switch for some of us to make it “right.” But, oh well…
By: aediculaantinoi on April 24, 2012
at 4:02 pm
Well, I do think that part of it is that people are more likely to walk by without comment if they like what they see than if they don’t, unless they’re driven to pure squee (which seldom happens to deep thoughtful posts by non-celebrities).
For myself, I respect you deeply as a person, and respect the work you do. Truth be told, I disagree with so many of your thoughts on theology and deeper causes and ramifications and so on, so often, that I have sometimes entertained thoughts of starting a counterblog to this one! But in the end, I usually leave these things unsaid, because I just don’t have deep emotional investment in them, and am not convinced that one person constantly playing devil’s advocate is ultimately productive, even if we both know (at least starting out) that it’s not meant personally. So that’s my excuse.
By: maryoftheassumptions on April 11, 2012
at 3:40 pm
And, even when you have expressed your disagreement on something, you do so in a very civil manner, which is much appreciated!
By: aediculaantinoi on April 11, 2012
at 6:00 pm
eh, I think it mostly has to do with the fact that Star is writing on subjects intended to be broadly encompassing of the “Pagan Community,” while you blog about a very particular subject (in this blog, at least). The former is always going to have way more controversy, because whatever you say someone who identifies as “Pagan” is going to have a something negative to say about it.
By: William Hood on April 11, 2012
at 4:21 pm
Yes–and that may really be the whole of it.
I don’t know what sorts of numbers they get over at the Patheos.com Pagan Portal on any given entry in the Pantheon blog, for example, on a daily basis, but I suspect it’s far higher than the 2-300 that I usually get here…
By: aediculaantinoi on April 11, 2012
at 6:01 pm
I agree, that was my impression too.
FWIW, I don’t get all that many comments on most of my posts (the exceptions usually being those that apply to – and are distributed amongst – a wider pagan demographic), and I certainly don’t get the kind of negativity Star refers to. But then, I wouldn’t tolerate that for a moment. Maybe people pick up on that. I spent years suffering from the constant negativity of the lists, and I am so done with that. I would rather get no comments at all than have to deal with that again. In my book, you are doing something right if you’re avoiding that.
By: Dver on April 11, 2012
at 6:37 pm
Thank you, dear friend!
Yes, I don’t want that kind of attention; so, in a way, this is a kind of accomplishment. I just wondered if there is a particular reason (apart from the “obscurity” of the primary interests here) that I’m not getting very much negativity.
(And, I have had a few comments I’ve deleted over the two years: ones that were directing hostility toward people that aren’t me but who likewise weren’t responding on a particular post; and, I had a bad back-and-forth with someone who came in and basically told me I’m doing everything with the EA “wrong” in terms of membership and set-up and so forth, with no basis whatsoever to say anything they were saying, etc. But, that’s really two people/sets of comments out of the entire two years I’ve been doing this…so, I guess that’s a pretty good track record thus far! I’ve had more negative and threatening/demeaning comments on Witchvox posts than I have over this blog!)
By: aediculaantinoi on April 11, 2012
at 9:38 pm
LOL, true that. The only negative responses I ever got on a published article were on “The Charge of the Goddess as Ethical Precept,” from someone who was offended that I would dare suggest that Pagans had a universal law of conduct. (Spoiler: I didn’t.) Most of what you post here is to a specific enough audience that it would be challenging for most people to get defensive and het up about it.
By: maryoftheassumptions on April 11, 2012
at 10:27 pm
That’s rather apt, and you’re right, the broader your blogging brush, the more likely you are to say something that annoys one person or another. Whereas the narrower the niche, the more likely to gather comments that are positive.
By: Ruadhán on April 23, 2012
at 2:51 am
I suppose I’m a “lurker” (is that word still relevant in the Facebook/Twitter age?), in that I read your blog almost daily but have only posted comments twice (once to express my interest in the Tetrad and once to congratulate you on your newest book). Personally, I absolutely love everything you write about here on this blog, from the Tetrad to the Sancti to the posts about syncretism and of course everything related to Antinous. I see your blog as primarily educational in nature, in that I deeply respect your well-researched and thoughtful approach and almost always learn something new about Antinous or Magna Mater or Cú Chulainn or the Shinto religion or what-have-you. And though I happen to be an educator, poet, and independent scholar myself, your posts and articles are consistently so thorough in their treatment of any given subject that often I feel as satisfied as if I’d just read an academic paper published in a peer-reviewed journal (though your posts are also a lot more fun!). Which is another one of the main reasons I enjoy reading your blog. I have a very busy life, and I don’t have the time or energy or to surround myself with drama and negativity (which is why I stopped reading the various pagan/Hellenic/polytheist email lists long ago). I am perpetually baffled and horrified by most online comments in general (have you ever seen the hatred and ignorance spewed by most of the comments following the articles on Yahoo News? *shudder*). Likewise, there are many pagan/polytheist blogs and forums I completely avoid because of the drama they create. Whenever your blog tackles a controversial issue in the pagan community, you always respond in a thoughtful, informed, and above all, civil manner. This is not going to generate death threats and ad hominem attacks (thank gods!), and I think that’s a good thing. That’s part of why I enjoy your blog. So unless you want to intentionally generate controversy by polluting this wonderful blog with sweeping generalizations, spiteful ad hominem attacks, and ignorant tirades (which I guess would turn you into the Ann Coulter of the contemporary cultus of Antinous?!?), I honestly think you should just keep up the great work you are doing and be glad you are not drawing negative people towards you.
(And I should add that I do not mean to imply that Star Foster – or any other blogger – is responsible for the death-threats and personal attacks she has received. I’m not saying that at all. Such behavior is completely horrible and should not be tolerated under any circumstances. It’s most unfortunate that Star’s hard work at Patheos.com on behalf of the pagan community has obviously put her blog into a position of prominence that has drawn the inevitable detractors, ne’er-do-wells, and damaged people. Which is really sad, because she has clearly done a great deal of good over there.)
However, you have made me seriously consider finding time to comment more, both here on this blog and the other blogs I enjoy (such as Sannion’s House of Vines, Dver’s A Forest Door, and John Michael Greer’s The Archdruid Report), even if it’s just to say you thank you. I don’t have a Facebook, I don’t tweet, and I’m not one of those Hellenic polytheists who feels the need to constantly chip in to question and quibble and nitpick everything that is written on the internet that disagrees with my own personal understanding of the gods. And if/when I have time/energy for such discourse about my own beliefs I would rather create my own blog than attack the work of others. But that doesn’t mean I can’t make an effort to post more comments of a positive nature. I try to support the work of bloggers who are also published authors by buying their books whenever I can, but this post has definitely made me re-think my kneejerk “lurker” response to most of the blogs I read.
So thank you, P. Sufenas Virius Lupus, for everything you do. I don’t think you’re doing anything wrong at all.
My two cents,
Ryan
By: Ryan on April 11, 2012
at 4:50 pm
Thank you very much indeed!
Yes, bloggers (in this type of forum, at least), I think tend to appreciate comments, especially if they’re encouraging or positive. So, if and when you feel so moved, do by all means comment more here, and at Sannion’s and Dver’s, and elsewhere–it will be most welcome!
I try not to read the comment sections on certain online articles and such, because they always just make me feel worse about the general human condition!
By: aediculaantinoi on April 11, 2012
at 6:04 pm
I always feel that way if I happen to wonder to the comment section at the bottom of, say, a Yahoo! news article. That will make you just want to give up on life sometimes. Teh internets are such a wonderful tool, especially for Pagans, who might otherwise not be able to connect with other Pagans. But, the ability to say anything you want and do so anonymously without facing any real life consequences tends to bring out the worst in a lot of people. I’ve never faced the kind of negativity directed at me personally that Star obviously has, but even I just get worn out with being online sometimes because of the negativity and I just have to walk away for a while and do real life things.
By: Kauko on April 11, 2012
at 10:00 pm
I agree with the above comment that some of it probably has to do with your assumed gender. In addition, your posts tend to come from a very academic bent, which may cause people to be less likely to argue with you.
By: Jack on April 11, 2012
at 6:09 pm
And, I find both of those things interesting…and flawed.
Firstly, of course, because the gender assumptions of many readers simply aren’t true, and thus I suspect they’re not reading very closely. Apart from repeatedly stating “I’m not a man, and please don’t refer to me as one” in every other post, I don’t know how this can be changed…
But secondly, academic phrasing and theorizing is not above argumentation, and in fact ought to facilitate it (in a civil manner, hopefully!). It somewhat worries me that just because a particular thing is phrased a certain way that people would be less likely to argue with it, when a great many things that are entirely objectionable get phrased in much more “respectable” and “traditional” fashions than I do here…Everything should be questioned and critically evaluated, and while not everything needs to be outright contradicted or challenged just for the sake of it, at the same time, I’m pretty clear in repeatedly saying “I think” rather than “this is the absolute truth” on almost anything and everything I write here…
People: a very weird species, to say the least. The gods are so much easier to understand in too many cases!
By: aediculaantinoi on April 11, 2012
at 9:43 pm
I am fairly new to your blog (and finding it very interesting to peruse) but I would suspect the reason for the lack of drama is partly the one you’ve already touched on. It is very niche and also quite academic, so I suspect that most of the kind of readers who might leave death threats and obscenity-laced tirades are (if they find this blog at all) going to read a few sentences and then wander off, feeling lost.
I understand what you mean that you wonder what people are taking away from it, but personally I would be glad not to be overwhelmed by a slew of abusive comments and to attract a mostly well-behaved audience. I’m always glad to stay well out of the way of online beastliness as much as possible.
I notice you’ve already got lots of comments for this entry – because you’ve actively invited a response, rather than providing lots of interesting information and ideas which people may enjoy reading but not necessarily feel impelled to directly respond to. You could try asking readers for their responses as part of your posts if you want more interaction (apologies if you already do this).
By: Clodia on April 11, 2012
at 6:12 pm
It’s a fairly constant refrain from me: “I’d be interested in what you, the readers, think about this!” and so forth…I’m pretty eager for feedback on anything and everything I post here, and while I don’t always put a phrase like the previous one at the end of posts, I do it very often (with exceptions, like the primarily “devotional” ones that I do, etc.).
But, thanks for your feedback and for reading! I do appreciate it!
By: aediculaantinoi on April 11, 2012
at 9:35 pm
While I can’t speak for anyone else who reads this blog, obviously, I should point out that as a rule, your posts are well thought out and eloquent. Which, honestly sometimes puts me off commenting. There’s nothing I feel I’ve got to add, or ask for clarification about. Frequently, I feel like I could only reasonably comment if I let the post bubble away on the back burner of my mind for a day or so… and then forget to comment when it’s done. But then, I’ve also only ever commented on Star’s posts to say ‘ignore the trolls, you’re doing great’. Maybe I’m an anomaly.
By: violetdoodles on April 12, 2012
at 12:21 am
I find your blog interesting and level headed, sometimes long winded
Perhaps, as was mentioned to me a few times, folks lose interest and attention spans are too short to go beyond one page. Another is probably because you don’t tend to overly dramatize your subject matter.
As someone who has been banned from commenting on Star’s blog for reasons which to me seem puerile, my posts were critical to be sure but neither threatening ,or ad hominim, I can’t say I have much sympathy.
That isn’t to say she deserves these kinds of threats, no one does simply due to what they write, but she opens herself up to these kinds of reactions due to her tendency to over state and sensationalise.
By: henry on April 12, 2012
at 4:08 am
I’m chiming in with Henry here. I don’t even pay attention to Star most of the time because she engages in so much tone policing when marginalized populations speak up on her blog.
By: sonneillonv on April 13, 2012
at 9:16 am
Well, there’s a few major differences between your writings and Star’s that I think contribute to the different reactions you get. As others have pointed out, there’s a difference in focus (yours really does read much more as pieces for a niche audience), and even then not all. I must admit that I tend to skim articles that are Roman in nature and carefully devour the ones that deal with Celtic and Shinto experiences and ideas.
Something else already mentioned if the academic tone you maintain here. And I think that, the tone, is the important part. Whether or not you feel what you write on this blog is suitable for peer review, you maintain a style and tone that brings it across as such for the readers. You don’t leave statements packed, you don’t leave ideas hanging out there all alone, but you support them, unpack them, extrapolate and ponder and project them. You actually cite sources, now and again.
Your own reactions to commentors, even ones you disagree with, is almost without fail polite, inquisitive, the feeling of a thinker who wants to explore an idea together, instead of a demagogue defending a piece of ground.
In short, you create an atmosphere here that, if it was a physical place, would be a comfy room in the bowels of a library where people go to compare notes, argue ideas, trade experiences, and then dive back in for more. Star’s blog… does not. The atmosphere over there… Having lived in extremely rural areas in my earlier days, the atmosphere over there really reminds me of the old men’s coffee club (held in the town’s only diner every morning before they got to work) or the snippiness of a “discussion group” the local school tries to run for adults, but without supervision. Both what she posts, how she phrases, and even more importantly, how she reacts to comments that are not threatening but not immediately supportive, all change the mood and tone of the place.
By: Brannen on April 12, 2012
at 4:20 am
I will agree with others that it has a lot to do with the subject. Most people who read a blog with a historical and reconstructionist bent are looking for ideas. We read the blog to find others who think in the same manner even if a different path. We read these blogs to get ideas on how to structure our own practice, and to see what others think of what we have created.
By: S.T. on April 12, 2012
at 7:08 am
My comment may be a little weird and out of place compared to the rest, and it obviously only reflects my point of view, but one of the things that makes it a little difficult for me to really engage on your blog is the format.
The type is very small, and being light gray on a white background, it makes it difficult for me to see (my vision’s 20/25, not perfect, but not bad either). You tend to write very long, academically involved posts, which is GREAT, but when I’m staring at a huge block of small faint text, I usually decide that’s way too much effort for something that is only tangentially related to my own Practice. It’s not that I’m not fascinated by what you write, it’s more that it’s difficult to read. By the time I get done reading it, when I choose not to just move on, I’m usually having trouble keeping straight what I’ve read (could be related to my ADD, but I’ve found small text just doesn’t sink in as well as text that’s a comfortable size for my eyes to rest on and absorb) and that eliminates my ability to contribute to the discussion in any meaningful way.
That’s just my two cents. Comparatively it’s a nitpick, I know.
By: sonneillonv on April 12, 2012
at 10:07 am
About Star Foster … I sympathise up to a point Death threats and harassment are inexcusable.
However, I have quite different experiences at patheos, experiences which have led me to limit my commenting on blogs. Every time I say something that is remotely critical, I have been vilified. Actualy I have been attacked because I said their does exist a link between extreme obesity and diabetes. I have been vilified for saying things that I consider to be facts or for saying that that telling kids that being fat is ok is not enough, that self-acceptence is not enough, and they we should promote a healthy life-style. More and more patheos is becoming a rather hostile environment, and this is not just because of badly behaved visitors but also to Star’s defensive attitude. I want to emphasize that this all concerns Star’s personal blog, not the other pagan blogs that patheos hosts. And her behaviour on a certain private facebook group did not help much to get into my good graces.
I do not know Star personally. I can only go by my online experiences, and the real-life experiences of friends.
I feel that there two standards at Star’s patheos. If I do not agree with her, well than I am unreasonable and putting words in her mouth. Yet if she says something controversial and we comment on her, well than we are being disrespectful. I find this very sad because I used to love her reading.
Now about your blog. Some reasons why I am commenting not as much as perhaps I should:
1. It takes a while to read your blog, and I read all of your entries, and because of their depth, I often do not feel I have to time to write a lengthy comment. And I do not just want to write, damn this is interesting! I guess it comes to, when I write something I want to write something well.
2. You write about topics of which I do not have any specialist knowledge. Thus, I feel poorly adapted to debate. Moreover, my own practice is very different to yours.
3. I usually respond to blogs when something his urgently relevant to me. At the moment I do reply a lot on Dver’s blog, because at the moment, her writings are more urgently relevant.
4. Due to earlier problems with public blogs (see the above), I rather stick to somewhat protected and private communities for further debate and elaboration.
5. I tend to agree with most of what you write in your more essay-like pieces (which I find the most captivating, perhaps it seems to be uncommon in the pagan blogosphere). And I respond more quickly if I disagree
By: soliwo on April 12, 2012
at 1:23 pm
I forgot to say the most important thing. I appreciate your blog immensely and I think it is probably the only one of its kind. You take your readers seriously, which is much rarer than you might think. You examine what other people take for granted.
Your writings and your presence on the Neos Alexandria group are much valued, especially your kind and patient reply’s to a girl who suddenly faced Perspephone and did not have a clue. I’ll soon give you an update on that score that I still owe you.
By: soliwo on April 12, 2012
at 1:30 pm
Thank you very much indeed!
And, certainly, I look forward to hearing/reading your thoughts on Persephone and your further experiences with her!
By: aediculaantinoi on April 12, 2012
at 5:50 pm
and what is Bueller?
By: soliwo on April 12, 2012
at 2:09 pm
Oh…!
“Bueller?” is a line from the movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off, which was a mainstay of the childhood of many people who grew up in the later 80s. In it, Matthew Broderick plays Ferris Bueller, a really popular kid at high school who decides to fake being sick one day to go out and have fun with his friends. One of his teachers, for an Economics class, is played by Ben Stein, who very famously has an extremely boring voice. When he goes through the roll call at the beginning of class, he says each student’s name, and they respond in various ways, and then he gets to “Bueller,” and he just keeps repeating it over and over again the same way in as boring a voice as possible, and there is just dead silence. Later, in his lecture, he pauses now and again and says “Anyone? Anyone?” to see if any students will supply the next bit of information he’s looking for.
So, “Bueller?” gets used amongst people who have been steeped in that film during childhood or teenagerhood as shorthand for the “I’m not getting any response here and all that there is is dead silence.”
I hope that makes sense!
By: aediculaantinoi on April 12, 2012
at 5:50 pm
Strange. I never heard of this film before, and today I came across 3 seperate references to it! Perhaps I am a bit too young (born in 86), but I’ve see plenty of movies from the eighties so I’m not sure why I missed it. I will watch it soon to upgrade my knowledge of obscure popular culture.
By: soliwo on April 13, 2012
at 3:48 am
Oh, crikey…Well, yes, it is good to fill in the holes in one’s knowledge, but if it comes down to this film and, say, the latest Sherlock Holmes film with Robert Downey Jr., Jude Law, and Stephen Fry, I’d suggest going for the latter instead. Ferris Bueller will always be there…
By: aediculaantinoi on April 13, 2012
at 3:54 am
Sherlock Homes, really? That is not quite my thing. I don’t like big movie theatres anyway, if I go out I tend to go to the smaller art houses.
By: soliwo on April 15, 2012
at 1:33 am
You are doing just fine, Phillupus. I don’t necessarily agree with everything you say, but your posts are always interesting. A day without a new post on your blog is a dull day.
Now, if you want some criticisms – posts about Celtic and Shinto subject matter are interesting, but not particularly relevant to my own interests, which are very much “Mediterranean centric”. I find gender discussions to be lacking in both interest and relevance. My own opinion is that gender identification is physical only and, ultimately, not very important. That’s just my opinion, and I am not interested in debating the subject with anyone. So, some of your posts are less interesting from my point of view, but I suppose that’s not really a criticism as such.
Just keep it up, Phillupus, just keep it up!
By: qpoppaeus9 on April 12, 2012
at 4:36 pm
[...] very much to everyone who has commented thus far on my last post. If you have not done so yet, please feel free to; and if I have not yet responded, please be [...]
By: Announcing Academia Antinoi! « Aedicula Antinoi: A Small Shrine of Antinous on April 12, 2012
at 6:24 pm
I think you are pointing out a sad fact in modern culture. When some folks move behind a computer screen, all sense of treating others with integrity and respect goes out the window. Great post, brother!
By: Br. Jay on April 13, 2012
at 4:36 am
Thanks for responding!
Indeed, it’s a very big problem, I think–from cyber-bullying to the rotten comments people leave on news stories and blog posts, to any number of other things…
It seems so strange that people can so easily forget to “be human” just because they’re using their fingers to communicate rather than their mouths (and the rest of their bodies…and, I shudder to think, their minds and souls…!?!).
By: aediculaantinoi on April 13, 2012
at 9:49 am