<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Caty Simon and the Virtues of Vice (part two)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/</link>
	<description>In defense of the sanctimonious women&#039;s studies set.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:50:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Joan Kelly</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-276718</link>
		<dc:creator>Joan Kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-276718</guid>
		<description>atlasien - I&#039;m not sure if that&#039;s directed at my last comment?  If it is, just wanted to say - I don&#039;t think it&#039;s possible or desirable to police any of this conversation.   I just felt like - the original objections to this post were about something specific, and they were/are criticisms I sometimes agreed with.  To have it turn in the end to &quot;you&#039;re an addict in denial!&quot; - I&#039;m not saying that&#039;s even incorrect (I&#039;m not, myself, making that call), I&#039;m just saying it felt to me like &quot;I&#039;m mad at some things Caty said and won&#039;t bend on, and while I&#039;m at it here&#039;s a potential weak spot of hers *personally*, and since it may be related, it&#039;s fair game.&quot;  Whereas I didn&#039;t feel like it was fair game, true or untrue.  

If we&#039;re in Caty&#039;s life and we&#039;re her family and friends and decide we think she&#039;s in trouble and we&#039;re going to do an intervention - okay, it&#039;s on topic.  But the topic (and what angered people or evoked criticism) was not &quot;is that darn Caty an addict in denial?!&quot;  So going there with it felt unfair to me, that&#039;s all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>atlasien &#8211; I&#8217;m not sure if that&#8217;s directed at my last comment?  If it is, just wanted to say &#8211; I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s possible or desirable to police any of this conversation.   I just felt like &#8211; the original objections to this post were about something specific, and they were/are criticisms I sometimes agreed with.  To have it turn in the end to &#8220;you&#8217;re an addict in denial!&#8221; &#8211; I&#8217;m not saying that&#8217;s even incorrect (I&#8217;m not, myself, making that call), I&#8217;m just saying it felt to me like &#8220;I&#8217;m mad at some things Caty said and won&#8217;t bend on, and while I&#8217;m at it here&#8217;s a potential weak spot of hers *personally*, and since it may be related, it&#8217;s fair game.&#8221;  Whereas I didn&#8217;t feel like it was fair game, true or untrue.  </p>
<p>If we&#8217;re in Caty&#8217;s life and we&#8217;re her family and friends and decide we think she&#8217;s in trouble and we&#8217;re going to do an intervention &#8211; okay, it&#8217;s on topic.  But the topic (and what angered people or evoked criticism) was not &#8220;is that darn Caty an addict in denial?!&#8221;  So going there with it felt unfair to me, that&#8217;s all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: atlasien</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275825</link>
		<dc:creator>atlasien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:35:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275825</guid>
		<description>Good luck policing that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good luck policing that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hexy</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275823</link>
		<dc:creator>hexy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:02:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275823</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;People have a right to their opinions, but Caty’s denial or lack thereof, of her relationship to drugs, is not anyone’s business, unlike what Caty may say about drugs in general, which is up for discussion in this thread.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Yes, this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>People have a right to their opinions, but Caty’s denial or lack thereof, of her relationship to drugs, is not anyone’s business, unlike what Caty may say about drugs in general, which is up for discussion in this thread.</p></blockquote>
<p>Yes, this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hexy</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275822</link>
		<dc:creator>hexy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275822</guid>
		<description>I read her as pretty clearly saying &quot;not all heroin use is harmful&quot;, as opposed to &quot;any heroin use... is harmless&quot;. There&#039;s a pretty big distinction.

And there&#039;s a huge difference between regulating the &quot;supply&quot; of drugs and human beings because human beings are not a product. Humans can offer services, but they should not be treated the same as an inanimate fucking commodity. Whatever the politics of the speaker.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read her as pretty clearly saying &#8220;not all heroin use is harmful&#8221;, as opposed to &#8220;any heroin use&#8230; is harmless&#8221;. There&#8217;s a pretty big distinction.</p>
<p>And there&#8217;s a huge difference between regulating the &#8220;supply&#8221; of drugs and human beings because human beings are not a product. Humans can offer services, but they should not be treated the same as an inanimate fucking commodity. Whatever the politics of the speaker.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brit</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275638</link>
		<dc:creator>brit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 14:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275638</guid>
		<description>&quot;Wow. I’m stunned and horrified by this thread.&quot;

That.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Wow. I’m stunned and horrified by this thread.&#8221;</p>
<p>That.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joan Kelly</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275624</link>
		<dc:creator>Joan Kelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:35:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275624</guid>
		<description>Emily - I&#039;m not sure why this whole thread is horrifying to anybody, but I do agree that attacking the person (a couple of people saying &quot;you&#039;re in denial!&quot;) is... I don&#039;t know what&#039;s the word, unhelpful at the least?  People have a right to their opinions, but Caty&#039;s denial or lack thereof, of her relationship to drugs, is not anyone&#039;s business, unlike what Caty may say about drugs in general, which is up for discussion in this thread.

I didn&#039;t see Caty argue, though, that any heroin use is harmless - she does acknowledge addiction and associated harms.  She just doesn&#039;t think a) that she&#039;s addicted or b) that decriminalizing drugs would make more people addicted.  I don&#039;t think a) is something other people can really know for sure, but b) is predictably a heated topic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Emily &#8211; I&#8217;m not sure why this whole thread is horrifying to anybody, but I do agree that attacking the person (a couple of people saying &#8220;you&#8217;re in denial!&#8221;) is&#8230; I don&#8217;t know what&#8217;s the word, unhelpful at the least?  People have a right to their opinions, but Caty&#8217;s denial or lack thereof, of her relationship to drugs, is not anyone&#8217;s business, unlike what Caty may say about drugs in general, which is up for discussion in this thread.</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t see Caty argue, though, that any heroin use is harmless &#8211; she does acknowledge addiction and associated harms.  She just doesn&#8217;t think a) that she&#8217;s addicted or b) that decriminalizing drugs would make more people addicted.  I don&#8217;t think a) is something other people can really know for sure, but b) is predictably a heated topic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emily</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275621</link>
		<dc:creator>Emily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275621</guid>
		<description>Why is there a &quot;HUGE difference&quot; between regulating the supply of drugs and human beings?  All criminal statutes are intended to regulate human behavior regardless of whether the prohition is on the item or the behavior.  I don&#039;t think that&#039;s a disingenuous argument, please explain why you do.

Also, of course a dialogue on drug use should include the voice of users.  My point was that a rhetorical argument for decriminalization coming from a past addict and present user is easily dismissed as that: rhetoric.  Especially when her argument seems to be based almost entirely upon the idea that any heroine use, even having it available for recreational use, is not harmful to the individual or society.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is there a &#8220;HUGE difference&#8221; between regulating the supply of drugs and human beings?  All criminal statutes are intended to regulate human behavior regardless of whether the prohition is on the item or the behavior.  I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s a disingenuous argument, please explain why you do.</p>
<p>Also, of course a dialogue on drug use should include the voice of users.  My point was that a rhetorical argument for decriminalization coming from a past addict and present user is easily dismissed as that: rhetoric.  Especially when her argument seems to be based almost entirely upon the idea that any heroine use, even having it available for recreational use, is not harmful to the individual or society.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hexy</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275619</link>
		<dc:creator>hexy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:53:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275619</guid>
		<description>She didn&#039;t say you couldn&#039;t do it. She just said it was a fucked up thing to do which she found unacceptable.

As do I.

Also, you didn&#039;t tell her she was stupid. You specifically said she was an addict in denial and enabling other addicts. There&#039;s a bit of a difference. Stupidity is far more easily assessed via intertubes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>She didn&#8217;t say you couldn&#8217;t do it. She just said it was a fucked up thing to do which she found unacceptable.</p>
<p>As do I.</p>
<p>Also, you didn&#8217;t tell her she was stupid. You specifically said she was an addict in denial and enabling other addicts. There&#8217;s a bit of a difference. Stupidity is far more easily assessed via intertubes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: atlasien</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275395</link>
		<dc:creator>atlasien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 13:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275395</guid>
		<description>@Li: who died and made you God of the internet?  &quot;Nobody gets to judge anyone except me.  It is ABSOLUTELY not OK blarg blarg blarg&quot;.  

I&#039;ll judge as I see fit, based on reason, logic, and my own experience with drugs.  Of which I have a fair amount.  If someone on the internet OR in person says they&#039;re doing something stupid, I&#039;m going to tell them it&#039;s stupid.  This includes anything from home trepanation, vaccination refusal, quote-unquote responsible heroin use or trying to smoke banana peels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Li: who died and made you God of the internet?  &#8220;Nobody gets to judge anyone except me.  It is ABSOLUTELY not OK blarg blarg blarg&#8221;.  </p>
<p>I&#8217;ll judge as I see fit, based on reason, logic, and my own experience with drugs.  Of which I have a fair amount.  If someone on the internet OR in person says they&#8217;re doing something stupid, I&#8217;m going to tell them it&#8217;s stupid.  This includes anything from home trepanation, vaccination refusal, quote-unquote responsible heroin use or trying to smoke banana peels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Faith from F.N.</title>
		<link>http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2009/09/06/caty-simon-and-the-virtues-of-vice-part-two/#comment-275386</link>
		<dc:creator>Faith from F.N.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:54:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministe.us/blog/?p=15913#comment-275386</guid>
		<description>&quot;No, you do not. It is absolutely not ok to… etc.&quot;

It is absolutely ok for me to speak of my experiences with drug users and addicts. I am fully entitled to do exactly that just as Caty is allowed to speak her piece. 

I have a tremendous amount of experience with drug users and addicts, which is precisely why I&#039;m so passionate about this subject. While I can understand some of the arguments for decriminalization (whether I agree with them or not), the idea that we should accept heroin use as responsible is just a vile argument that absolutely will and does enable addicts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;No, you do not. It is absolutely not ok to… etc.&#8221;</p>
<p>It is absolutely ok for me to speak of my experiences with drug users and addicts. I am fully entitled to do exactly that just as Caty is allowed to speak her piece. </p>
<p>I have a tremendous amount of experience with drug users and addicts, which is precisely why I&#8217;m so passionate about this subject. While I can understand some of the arguments for decriminalization (whether I agree with them or not), the idea that we should accept heroin use as responsible is just a vile argument that absolutely will and does enable addicts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: basic
Database Caching 16/21 queries in 0.036 seconds using disk: basic

Served from: www.feministe.us @ 2012-02-10 07:57:09 -->
