From: matt@smoke.brl.mil (Matthew Rosenblatt)
Newsgroups: misc.legal
Subject: Re: Sinead O'Connor's Freedom of Speech ( was Re: SNL - Oct 3, Latest on Sinead reaction
Summary: A more accurate distinction.
Keywords: ENVY; RESENTMENT; VE-RI-TAS
Date: 8 Oct 92 16:32:42 GMT
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab, APG MD.

In article <1992Oct7.162814.1220@Princeton.EDU> 
egnilges@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Edward G. Nilges) writes:

>In article <1992Oct7.133100.10766@linus.mitre.org> 
>jswartz@mbunix.mitre.org (Swartz) writes:

>>I find it mildly amusing that S(k)in(h)ead wouldn't appear on SNL with
>>Andrew Dice Clay because of how "offensive" she found him, and now she
>>may be banned from SNL for being offensive herself.
>>[J Swartz]

>The Cute Bald Chick didn't refuse to appear with ADC because she found
>him offensive, but because she found him wrong.  Andrew Dice Clay
>attacks people who can't hit back (women, gays, and so forth) to make a
>buck.  Sinead attacks powerful people including Margaret Thatcher and
>John Paul who have countless ways of hitting back, such as mobilizing
>the Daily News and New York Post to boycott future appearances.  . . .
>. . .
>Hope this helps you understand the difference.   [Ed Nilges]

I disagree with Mr. Nilges's interpretation, and offer my own.

Public figures who run afoul of the feminists or of ACT-UP 
find out pretty quickly that these organized pressure groups 
can indeed "hit back."  The feminists do it with the coercive
force of judge-made or legislated law.  ACT-UP does it in the
'Sixties "Movement" tradition of disrupting activities of which
it disapproves.

My own interpretation is that entertainers like Andrew Dice Clay
attack people and groups who ENVY and RESENT Mr. Clay for what
he is -- a prosperous and successful achiever.  Mr. Clay makes
his attacks in order, as Mr. Nilges so accurately puts it, "to
make a buck."  He feels neither ENVY nor RESENTMENT towards the
people and groups he attacks, nor are his attacks intended to
appeal to any such ENVY or RESENTMENT on the part of his audience.

On the other hand, someone like Sinead O'Connor surely ENVIES and
RESENTS the power, prestige and success achieved by those whom Mr. 
Nilges again accurately describes as "powerful people including Margaret
Thatcher and John Paul," each of whom rose to the top of the hierarchy
in his chosen field.  Her attacks have the purpose, and probably the 
effect, of sharpening widespread ENVY and RESENTMENT against the
successful and powerful -- especially on the part of women who 
are barred from attaining even the lowest rung (priesthood) on 
the ladder that leads to the Papacy.  Too bad, Sinead: if you wanted
the power that the Pope has, you should have been born a boy.  We
don't see His Holiness going around tearing up pictures of Sinead
O'Connor.

Seriously, folks:  Check out the kind of speech that the "PC" crowd
is trying to suppress and punish.  They'll tell you they don't like
"invidious" remarks and gestures.  And maybe some of you think that
the word "invidious" means, like, "bad" or "uncool."  But the precise
definition of "invidious" is, "tending to cause discontent, animosity,
or envy"  (_Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary_).  If some
townie slut in Cambridge, Massachusetts grumbles about "rich Hahvud
bastids," that's not invidious because no Harvard student in his right
mind envies the townie slut.  But if some Harvard student tosses off
some airy remark about "unwashed townie sluts," that's invidious and
arguably "harassment" because there are plenty of unwashed townie sluts
who ENVY and RESENT the wealth, power, and privilege in store for the
Harvard student.

					-- Matt Rosenblatt
                                        (matt@amsaa.brl.mil)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TRUTH     JUSTICE     FREEDOM     YIDDISHKEIT     IVY     THE AMERICAN WAY
Newsgroups: misc.legal,alt.censorship,misc.headlines