Cainanite (imported) wrote: Sat Jul 09, 2011 9:38 pm
Please dear Internet Gods, let the story archive transfer to its new home.
I've got a novel 3/4 finished that needs a home. In the last few days I haven't been able to write, because I'm worried there won't be a place to unleash it when it's done.
Apparently most of our problems arose from some busybodies that were offended by the content of the archive. I can hear their lament even now. "Oh won't somebody please, think of the children!".
I can only hope our new hosts aren't as prudish, and understand that fiction doesn't hurt people. It is a necessary outlet. A safe place to work out or fantasies in a form where no-one gets hurt.
Oh, dear Internet Gods, am I asking too much?? Give me a sign, and I will sacrifice many bandwidths in your honor.
I posted the following text, here with two finger blunders corrected, in response to Cainanite, saved the text (which, as I am writing this is still on the Internet at the old IP address) and am plugging it in here, for whatever it may be worth (with the thought that the three subsequent postings by others on this thread on the old IP address server might be worth adding here; the text of those last three posts remains available for now):
Being something of a variation on the theme of a research scientist, I archive my writings; therefore, though I expect this posting on the BME server to seemingly soon as-though vanish identically, it will likely will not really go away.
Whether fiction is or is not harmless when put into "
" is, to me, of the form of a testable hypothesis, one especially suited to testing within the method of "dichotomous null-hypothesis -- alternate hypothesis in the manner of Karl Popper's work, Imre Lakatos' work, and Paul Feyerabend's work, framed in fair degree by the notions of scientific revolutions of Thomas Kuhn. This method, for me, necessarily includes the views of Feyerabend, as in his book, "Against Method."
A useful null hypothesis, I am guessing, may be of the form, "fiction doesn't hurt people." To this null hypothesis, I find the optimal dichotomous alternate hypothesis to be somewhat like, "Fiction may sometimes hurt someone."
To establish the alternate hypothesis, it is sufficient, and only necessary, to find a single instance of one person hurt by one fiction. I am one individual person who has been hurt by the imposition of a fiction, imposed by people who believed in the fiction that they had authority over my understanding of myself. The null hypothesis is thus found invalid and its pure dichotomy in the form of the alternate hypothesis is thus shown true.
It is "awefully" clear to me that fiction stories are, in and of themselves, perfectly harmless. What may be far from harmless are particular interpretations of fictions stories when acted on by people who interpret such stories in ways that, as acted on, become blatantly and overtly harmful.
While a fiction story as told may be utterly harmless, the same fiction story as heard may be acted upon in ways catastrophically destructive. The story as heard is, I surmise, outside the locus of control of the one tho tells the story.
It is my grasp of the Eunuch Archive that the stories sometimes touch deeply into some intense social taboos. These taboos are, in my research findings, what may drive the destructive violence of humanity's propensity for reciprocal retaliation and, even more tragically humanity's propensity for escalating reciprocal retaliation.
Of escalating reciprocal retaliation, as in the movie, War Games, in which the retaliation is in the form of a stragegy game of global thermonuclear war, the computer program finally comments, as I recall, "A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?"
To me, the essence of a taboo is in the asking of a forbidden question. When taboos are present, is not the ultimate taboo asking what is taboo, or, put another way, is it not of taboo when there is a forbidden question, to be unable to not ask, "What is the forbidden question." And what if asking what the forbidden question is, is moreso forbidden than all else, save for one thing. What if what is the most forbidden of all is not asking what is forbidden?
The MoM is just over a month from now. If I had a vote, I would vote for allowing time and effort, conversation and dialogue, at the MoM to work toward learning and sharing how to properly ask forbidden questions, the not asking of which is also forbidden.
Cainanite, my view is not that people are prudish and that led to the eunuch.org url shutdown. My view is that many "non-Eunuch Archive and Boards" members may be people do not understand themselves well enough to understand the deeper meanings of many of the Archive stories, and perchance have responded in fear, if not stark terror, of their socialization-trauma-generated inner self-constructs (self-construct is a synonym for imago?).
To me, the question at hand is not whether to save the Eunuch Archives. Why else would they be Archives? The question at.hand is how to save them decently and effectively, wisely and efficiently.
And I have archived these words locally, as is my wont to do as an erstwhile research scientist...
I share your hope and plan to learn what I can properly do to help bring that hope to realization.
Also, I have observed a brief notice flashing as I have been typing and copying-pasting my last post to this thread; the one which did not transfer. A little yellow box flashes on my screen with the text, "Auto-Saved". Once in a while the bit-bucket snatched some words I had written with the earlier version of vBulletin. So, it seems better, this new version, yes, indeed. Thanks to our excellent leaders for their work in keeping the Eunuch Archive alive!
