Theos-Talk Archives (April 1996 Message tl01316)

At 10:48 AM 4/28/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Alexis writes:
>
>> I don't "razor blade" things I'll leave
>>censorship to folks like you.
>
>And how do you know what I censor?  I probably hate censorship more than
you do.
>I work in a library and would get my feathers really ruffled if someone came
>in and tried
>to get some of our books taken out of the collection because the books
>weren't "proper", etc.
>I believe that people should have access to a whole array of differing
>points of view.  Marion Meade's book on HPB is right on the shelf at our
>library with Sylvia Cranston's HPB biography.  I like that.  Interested
>persons can read both, if they so choose, and see
>different viewpoints on HPB.

I don't know, or care, what you do in your library, but I do know what your
apparently tryint to do to me, and that's shut me up, and that Daniel, to
me, is censorship. You asked if I "razorbladed" Isis, of course I didn't and
I can't imagine how the notion would enter your head. One can totally and
absolutely disagree with something without "razorblading" it.
>
>
>> What I agree with are her views on
>>religion, on questioning authority (which is why I bother you so much
>>Daniel)
>
>One of the reasons I like HPB and her writings is because she questions
>authority!   And do you think I naively believe what HPB writes?  Believe
>what you will.  But if I question what
>you write it is not because it "bothers" me.  It is to draw you out.  To get
>you to state in
>explicit terms and with details what you mean by some of your generalized
>statements.  Maybe Chuck or Jerry S. can directly read your mind.  I
>can't--- so I ask questions even if
>you think they are aimless.  Yet it seems that when I ask you questions or
>when I ask you
>for more details or for your evidence or for your reasoning, instead of
>focusing on the
> subject under discussion, you instead focus on the personal and make
>some condescending (?) remark.  Fine.  Okay.

Daniel: I honestly have never seen one iota of evidence that you are simply
trying to "draw me out" to make more specific statements.  Nor do you
usually do so on docrtrinal matters when what I have said is perfectly
obviously my own personal experience. But my opinion, and my formed concepts
based on years and years of study are entirely dismissed by you if I don't
supply citations. You seem to want to operate on this list like a Doctoral
dissertation Committee, but that's not my view of what it is, it is, as far
as I knew when I signed on a place to air opinions. I take your inquisitions
personally becuase it seems to me that they are personal. I call you a
bully, becuase that's what it seems to me you're doing. I call some of your
inquisitions "idle curiosity" because the complete multi-thousand year of my
family has not possible bearing on any of your interests. You tell me what
my English ancestors in the 14th century have to do with your study of
Theosophy.
>
>Now another subject.  For example, concerning your statement that HPB was a
>lesbian.
>Does this statement "bother" me.  No, why should it?  If she was gay, then
>so be it.  Liesel
>and JRC say they don't care.  Oh, it's a boring subject!  But since I am a
>student of her life,
>I don't find the subject boring.  And by asking you to tell me more about
>how you know she
>was gay, I was hoping you would simply give some of the details about the
>subject.  Why make the general statement in the first place, if you are so
>unwilling to provide the details?
>I'm not saying that your grandfather was lying about it.  All I wanted to
>know was under what circumstances did he know that she was a lesbian?  When
>did he know her?  And a dozen other questions!  Any good historian would
>also ask such questions.

O.K. Let me explain something to you by parable> I have a Brother-in-Law,
his youngest brother is a "Gay Man", how do I know this? I don't actually
know this becuase he's a person whom I've never met. But my Mother has,
she's had dinner with him and his life partner. And so I can confidently
state that Don is Gay. And that's the case with Blavatsky, my Grandfather
told me she was Gay. He knew her, and I have more than once explained how,
they frequently met en passant in the world. My Grandfather was both a
soldier and a diplomat and traveled a great deal, they occasionally met. The
traveld in the same circles and he knew many people who also knew her. Can I
give you times and dates of meetings and conversations? Of course not, and
you surely know how impossible that would be. I also told you that my
Grandfather was a very close friend of Emil Wittgensteins, and I assume you
will admit that Wittgenstein and HPB were at least close friends. So then He
passed on to me what was comoonknowledge in their circle of friends and
relations.So then I can say I 'know" HPBV was Gay just as I know Don to be
Gay. That's all there is, there ain't no more!

Now, why did I bring it up? Oh it's very simple! I have personally
experienced really vicious discrimination as a Gay man from the E.S. and
through it, be extension, from the T.S. I think it perfectly equitable and
fair to point out that no society who was founded by a gay person should
discriminate against Gay People. It's a shame the late Mr. Carrithers isn;t
still with us, he could tell you that I'm not as awful as you think I am. I
recently turned a very nice letter from him to me over to Jerry Hejka-Elkins
for his Alexandria West Library.
>
>> I believe in the kind
>>of open minded attitude she brought to everything (the kind you certainly
>>don't possess). I enjoy the spirit of fun she brought to all the things she
>>did. (Once again unlike you)
>
>Again here are your personal jabs!  I hope you are enjoying them. : )

Oh I am. But why not? Daniel, you don't seem to understand that I view many
of the things you say to me as equally personal jabs. what's the matter
don't like two way streets? Why is it O.K. for you to accuse me of
"razorblading" books with some of whose contents I agree, and then accuse me
of "personal jabs". Come on Daniel...."What's sauce for the goose is sauce
for the gander". In my perception you have been inexcusably rude to me, and
when I react with irritation I am accused of "gettiing personal".."Give me a
Break!"
>
>
>And then you sign your posting:
>
>>I think even you will take my meaning when I sign myself formally:
>
>>H.S.H. Alexis Alexandreivitch, Prince Dolgorukii of Uriev
>
>Possibly you have signed this in jest?  A Chuckism? or is it a Chuckle-ism?
>
>Hoping for more details,
>
>DHC
>
Oh no Daniel, it was far from a jest. it is how I sign myself when I'm not
feeling friendly. It's a small part of who I am, and it makes me completely
different from you. We don't really come from the same planet. My life, and
my expereinces, becuase of that name are totally different from anything you
know or could know> We may be currently "out of power" but people like me
are the sum total of our family histories and genes. It really doesn't
matter to me how either you or Bee Brown view it, but there is a distinct
and definite "line", when that line is either crossed or about to be
crossed. people like me tend to stand on our dignity. Like it or not, that's
how I am, that's how my Mother is, and that's how HPB was, and all of our
family back into the mists of time. It's a reminder that I'm something
"other" than just plain Alexis.

alexis the oh so arrogant
the eclectic theosopher
veritas vincit omnia
Member: Gang of Five
>