OFF: Dio - response to comments (Warning: LONG)

[DRider]

replying onlist to comments directed toward me onlist:

first lets start w/ my final word:
SARDONIC - a synonym for SARCASTIC

Sarcasm has a few definitions - the one I had in mind was "a humorous form
of
expression used to expose the follies of others".....

Sarcasm is certainly nothing new to this list.

> You don't (really) know us, don't pretend like you do.

hmmm...

I have been on this list since 1998. I have seen you at numerous shows and
purchased CD's from you. And we are both from Ohio. (At least, I think you
are from Ohio - since you have lived there and know the area.) We also seem
to have some similar tastes in music....

>From what you say in your post, it seems like this statement applies much
much more to you.

It was pretty obvious (to me at least) that the first part of my post was a
direct response to Bob Mayo...... and then just some general responses......
NOT DIRECTED TOWARD ANY ONE PERSON IN PARTICULAR
(sorry about the ALL CAPS - but I want to make sure you get the point).
I started right off in joke mode and went from there.

Being completely straight-forward so there are no misunderstandings here - I
was saying that Dio has or had a pretty good voice. And while I agree w/
Doug
P. that some of his lyrics ARE ridiculous, Dio has put out a thing or 2 that
was pretty good. Obviously, some list members have purchased these items and
must have at least thought they had some merit at one point or another or
they would not have been able to form an opinion - one way or another.
Purchasing these items may mean that they thought these items might have
merit, but after hearing they may have thought differently....

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion was - maybe some folks
should give Dio his due and that while Gillan is a great singer - his voice
might not be up to handling the task of singing Stargazer at this point in
his career. Whereas, I have read reports that Dio still nails it when
performing this song live.

This is just music and we are adults. How can any of this be taken
very seriously?

back to this statement:

> You don't (really) know us, don't pretend like you do.

Seems like you don't - really know me - or you would have understood what I
was saying in the top portion of my post and that the bottom portion of the
post - which has you "annoyed" - was meant to provoke a concept called
'thought' in a joking manner.

I DO NOT remember addressing you in my post Keith. Did I use your name
anywhere?

Somehow you have taken something personal that was not intended to be
personal. If I had something directly to say to you on this topic or any
other topic, I would have emailed you directly. I did not do that, did I?

The last 3 lines of my post are just a few song titles or album tiles put in
series in what I thought was a humorous way.

A Mind is A Terrible Thing To Taste - an album, compact disc or whatever by
Ministry

Take The Skinheads Bowling - a humorous song by Camper Von Beethoven

Into The Pit - a song by Halford

> insinuate some sort of ulterior motive or objective.

This statement shows that you do not know me and that you have formed your
own opinion based on that erroneous fact. Anyone that knows me, knows I am a
straightforward person. If I have something to say to a person - I say it. I
am a "what you see is what you get" person w/ no hidden agenda and no reason
to insinuate anything about anyone. Had I felt the way that you have
interrupted that I felt, I would have emailed you directly and there would
have been absolutely no doubt as to those facts.

<snip>
On the other hand, it seems blatantly clear that you are
labeling me as homophobic (and 'narrow-minded' at the same
time) based (I can only assume) solely on the following statement
of mine:

Nope! Sorry, you are wrong!

Nothing blatant and nothing clear. Dude, if I thought this were true, I
would
have just come out and said it!

What - it's OK for you to make a joke, but it's not OK for me a make a
joke??

It seems like you are just continuing w/ this mindset here:
> You don't (really) know us, don't pretend like you do.

Talk about labeling! I guess according to you - my label is "outsider".

Not to mention the fact that we must have different definitions of the term
"blatant".

"Jane, you ignorant slut" Now, that's a blatant statement!
(used in a joking way to make a point)

> Do us all a favor, and really stop thinking too much about what people
write in their postings/emails.

Excuse me, but isn't that what you are doing??

The statements that I made that have you "annoyed" were made in a general
way.

Certainly, I am allowed to believe that Halford is more talented than Gillan
or Dio, right?

Certainly, I am allowed to believe that Halford has a better voice than
Gillian or Dio, right?

Certainly, I am allowed to believe that an intelligent man would never have
the guts to make homophobic remarks to Halford's face, right?

Ever think that maybe - just maybe - I was joking??

The 3rd statement seems to be the one that has got you going. Intelligence
and guts - guts basically means courage. Sure, there are intelligent people
who are not very courageous and courageous people who are not very
intelligent. To me, they can be inter-related in that an intelligent person
might know that there is a time and place for courage. To me, calling
Halford
a queer to his face would be an instance when someone's courage outweighed
their intelligence. Yes, you are correct he is gay. How long was he alive
before he "came out"? What could have been his motives for keeping it a
secret for so long?

Could it be - that I was speaking in a general sense and not speaking
directly to you, Keith??

What a concept!

Oh, but let's just play this out anyway. So there can be no doubt.

Keith, You have interviewed some folks in your time. If you had a chance to
interview Rob Halford, would you call him a "queer"? Would you call him a
"fag"?

Knowing you - I would say - NO, you would not do such a thing.  And why
would
that be?

Could it be because, you are an intelligent man and you know that those
terms
could be interpreted as derogatory?

Could it be because Halford is ripped w/ muscles and possibly a bit imposing
to a man of your stature?

To me, part of the concept of intelligence has to do w/ acceptance and
understanding. Intelligent people also tend to treat other human beings w/
some degree of respect. So even if a person was homophobic and/or  narrow-
minded - if that person got the job of interviewing Rob Halford, that person
would have enough intelligence and respect not to call Rob a queer during
the
interview. No matter what that person thought of Rob. Doing so would take
a fair deal of courage and not to much sense or intelligence.

If 3 men confronted one man in a parking lot and wanted to hurt him, he
could
be seen as courageous if he physically defended himself against them. But
that might not be the most intelligent thing do, would it?

Black people use the term "nigger", but is it OK for a white person to use
that term?

You may be thinking about the term "context".

And that seems to be an underlying topic here w/ some pettiness
thrown in for good measure.

<snip>
which: No. 1, should be obvious that it was intended as a
joke, making fun not of Rob Halford *anyway*, but rather
Rupert Murdoch and his never-ending pursuit of sensationalist
programming.

Now, that you have clarified it here. Yes, it is obvious. But no - it was
not
obvious in it's original form.

> If I *hadn't* said *Queer* Eye, then nobody would have known what the hell
I was referring to. Those (others) in Europe probably still don't know
(or care really).

I think that you might be assuming that more people knew what you were
referring to than there may have actually been at the time......

Is the concept for the potential TV show - a gay man w/ a shaved head that
can tell if another man w/ a shaved head is also gay....??  So sort of like
the term "gay-dar" (like radar) only for skinheads. Is that right?

Would any man who shaves his head be considered a skinhead?

Or isn't skinhead a potentially derogatory term (as the term 'queer' is
potentially a derogatory term) that is usually associated w/ a
narrow-minded,
male individual who may be prone to bigotry, racism and other ideals based
one way or another on hate.....?

So there's 2 potentially derogatory terms in the title of your fictitious TV
show?

Maybe, it's really about a gay man who shaves his head and has some special
ability to know the politics and sexual preference of another man who shaves
his head?? Talk about PSI Power!!

Do I think you are narrow-minded in particular? No

Do I think you are intelligent? Yes

Do I think you are courageous? Well, you came at me pretty good here, so
maybe yes.

Do I think you are homophobic? NO

Look at that! You had me wrong. I just "labeled" you as a courageous,
intelligent and open-minded man.

On the other hand......

Would it be absolutely acceptable if you were narrow-minded? Yes

Would it be absolutely acceptable if you were not intelligent? Yes

Would it be OK if you were homophobic? Yes

Would it be OK if you were not courageous? Yes

But IF you were a narrow-minded, unintelligent, homophobic, coward - would I
have the right to tell you so?

NO, I am NOT saying you ARE - but I AM trying to make a point.

So you were joking and I was joking. You thought it was obvious to all that
you were joking and I thought that it was obvious to all that I was joking.
Your idea of humor and my idea of humor may or may not be the same. Our ways
of conveying our sense of humor may not be the same.

>>>>>>>>>>This is clearly a misunderstanding<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I have addressed what I think may be key points here. However, you direct
some other negative comments in my direction. At this point, I am happy to
just let them slide. Unless, you really do want a debate. Should that be the
case, please contact me privately and let it rip. My intelligence and
courage
are certainly up to most any challenge.

To be clear:

Keith, I was not directing my comments toward you. I am sorry that you took
it that way. That was not my intention. I am sorry for any misunderstanding.

I try to look for positive things. The positive things that I have taken
from
this misunderstanding is a better knowledge of you and your opinions. And
even though your opinion of me may not be positive (possibly an
understatement).... At least now I know how you feel and what you think of
me....

Another positive thing that I have taken from this is that humor and email
don't always go hand in hand.

Ever wonder why so many people "lurk" on this list rather than post?

Peace,

Darrin

-----Original Message-----
From: Henderson Keith [mailto:keith.henderson at PSI.CH]
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2003 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: Sorry, OFF: Dio

Sorry list, but...

D-Rider responds most curiously...

>and as far as the "queer" remarks about Halford
>a) he has more talent in his shoe than Gillan or Dio
>b) at 52 years old - he STILL has a better voice than both of them combined
>c) an intelligent man would NEVER have the guts to make such (homophobic)
>    remarks to his face
>
>a (narrow) mind is a terrible thing to taste

Now, it takes quite a bit to get me annoyed, but you've
managed to do it.  'Cause this is not the first time you've
taken the liberty of extrapolating beyond the simple written
word to insinuate some sort of ulterior motive or objective.

On the other hand, it seems blatantly clear that you are
labelling me as homophobic (and 'narrow-minded' at the same
time) based (I can only assume) solely on the following statement
of mine:

>Rob is *really* back in Priest?  Hey Rupert!  Here's a new
>reality show idea for ya': "Queer Eye for the Skinhead."

which: No. 1, should be obvious that it was intended as a
joke, making fun not of Rob Halford *anyway*, but rather
Rupert Murdoch and his never-ending pursuit of sensationalist
programming.

And No. 2...insinuating that Rob Halford is 'queer' makes one
obviously homophobic *how*?  I mean, he *is* gay, no?  ("Not that
there's anything wrong with that," as Jerry S. would say.)  OK,
maybe you think that 'queer' suggests that one wishes to ridicule
that sort of lifestyle.  But you see, the TV show is *called*
"Queer Eye..." right?  What, you think *I'm* the one responsible
for naming it so?  Gimme a break.  If I *hadn't* said *Queer* Eye,
then nobody would have known what the hell I was referring to.
Those (others) in Europe probably still don't know (or care really).

Do us all a favor, and really stop thinking too much about what
people write in their postings/emails.  It's a very 'cold' style
of communication, if you know what I mean.  Sometimes people really
just are saying what they're saying, and not what *you* think
they're saying.  You don't (really) know us, don't pretend like you
do.

That's all, sorry for wasting everybody's time...

Grakkl (FAA)

P.S.  I should have known to expect illogic based on that given in
points a. and b. above.  :)