I’ve Moved!
November 20, 2008
So I’m sure that most people have noticed that the site has been offline for a few days. There’s a reason for that, which I will get to shortly. But first, let me just say this:
In fact, I am blogging at a new site I have just finished setting up: kennethhynek.net. A full explanation for the reasons behind the move can be found here
.
That said, this is not the end of Time Immortal. My wife Grace has expressed interest in taking over blogging at this domain, and I am working to make sure that she gets set up here as soon as possible.
Also, my profound apologies for the modification to the site face; the move was not as seamless as I would have hoped, and many of the image files for this theme, and in the gallery, were corrupted during the course of their evacuation from my previous web host’s servers. Until such time as I have repaired them, I’ve put a clean-looking template in place of the previous one.
Update: for the purposes of further traffic shaping, new posts from kennethhynek.net will be excerpted below. Full articles can be read at the new blog.
Reader Mail: homophobes? not likely, some of them are homosexual…
January 15, 2008
A reader sends in a short response to this article about Kathy Shaidle’s wondering whether the kids that run LawIsCool — the website of some of Mark Steyn’s legal antagonists — are closet homophobes, based on the accusation of homophobia they levelled at various conservative commentators who called them “nellies”.
The implication, as Shaidle saw it, was that in the minds of LawIsCool’s member bloggers, “gay” would necessarily have to equal “wimp” for them to make that connection and comeback.
My reader writes thusly:
“$500 says ‘LawIsCool’ are in fact a couple of homosexuals in Toronto”
I think that was the reference in question.
Your intentional mischaracterization is clearly libelous. Maybe they’ll take you to a CHRC.
There are two points I might make; first, it was not my characterization, but rather a funny bit of commentary from a lady known for her unique wit, which I found amusing and re-posted here. Part of the ebb and flow of blogging is this sort of criticism of people one acknowledges as opponents within the blogosphere — taking statements made and running with them. It’s not intended as libel, but as a critique of the intellectual inconsistency of the LawIsCool crowd.
More importantly, though, yes, I do realize that someone could haul me before the CHRC for any number of comments made on this site. That’s a risk I accept in doing what I do, saying what I say, thinking what I think, and believing what I believe. But so what? Someone may say I’m libelous and haul me before the government to answer for that…but any such person would, in so doing, reveal themselves to be a coward, a fascist, and a censor.
And thus reveal themselves to be an enemy of Canada in a way I could never dream to match.
Finally, a point of fact: while it is true that the LawIsCool types quoted the particular comment that my reader likewise cited, they follow up the quotation with this remark:
Other adjectives used include “nellies†and fairies, among other things, because apparantly standing up for marginalized communities to which one does not belong to is considered feminine (the women are especially offended).
They’ve been called “nellies” (or “wimps”, or similar) by more people than have made bets as to their sexual orientation, so that is the more significant component of their response. So what’s this talk about mischaracterization, anyhow, I wonder?
