What a way to start a day

[fpb]

Having a blog has its disadvantages. This morning I woke to find that some monster called jezreelite (if it is; had I done what it has done, not that I would dream of it, I would have used a sockpuppet) had slimed all over my blog, leaving poisonous and insulting answers all over my posts. The level of repulsiveness of this creature may be gauged by two of its comments. In the post about abortion, headnoises (I think it was her, and at any rate she would not be ashamed of it) had asked what could possibly be worse than being dead. jezreelite's attempt at an answer was to post photos of three deformed babies. So being ugly or disabled is worse than being dead. So I, who am ugly, and my brother, who is disabled, ought not to have been allowed to live - for that reason and that reason alone. What a piece of work. And in the post where I raged about terrorists abusing innocent Down's Syndrome cases (do you see a trend developping here?) for mass murder, the creature concluded that I hate Muslims and "sand n******" - yes, the N-word. The creature went as far back as the post on the movie "300", where, not finding anything it could object to, it objected to the fact that I had dedicated so much time to an unimportant film! (Of course, my problem was with Frank Miller's immense cultural influence and its Fascist overtones, but never mind.)

Of course the filth is now banned, and any future post that even looks like it is from it will be deleted on the spot. But what a Hell of a way to start a day.

Comments

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I would guess that this person was first offended by my post about abortion as a crime - which I admit was fighting talk, and meant to be; and, having a narrow and prejudiced view of anti-abortion campaigners, went looking for reasons to support said view. Since in fact I do not fit that stereotype, it was inevitable that my views should be distorted and misrepresented. I imagine that the worst disappointment was to find, reading the 300 post, that I was an articulate and fierce enemy of Fascism, and knew quite a lot about it.

But there is something that underlies that. The post where it all began basically made the point that, if abortion is wrong, then it is no defence to say that it should be safe. The issue then becomes, is it wrong, or is it not? One or two people tried to answer in various ways - prylliepwns, for instance, with the widespread and not indefensible view that only those who have to endure a pregnancy ought to be able to decide on the matter. This is an arguable position, but arguable is exactly what it is - it can be argued, morally and rationally, for and against. jezreelite, on the other hand, posted three disgusting pictures. The appeal, that is, was not to the mind or even to the heart, but to the senses: the point of revolting (or supposedly revolting) pictures of babies, if unaccompanied by actual descriptions of really hopeless conditions that would make life not worth living, simply intend to hit at the gut level. That is how this person thinks, or rather feels. Disgust is a reason in itself. Life, it claims, can be so disgusting that it would be better not to have to live it. And someone who reacts on such a visceral level, without argument or principle, is not well positioned to argue properly or take in opponents' views. Disgust or approval is all it has to offer.

[headnoises.livejournal.com]

More than a few folks have looked at ultrasounds of my sister's first son, who had feet turned up as far as you can turn your hands up against your arms to be "even," and suggested he should have been killed-- thankfully, none suggested this near my adoring sister, nor her husband, nor myself-- at least not in person. Three suggested it on the phone. Two hung up on the following string of "conversation" with my sweet, kind, loving, in-five-years-of-being-a-twit-never-said-boo-sister.

We would gladly do physical harm to any who suggest the death of a lovely, laughing little boy.
http://picasaweb.google.com/headnoises/SqueekerDelux
For pictures.