F.A.O EL GUAPO

El the Thelema author I was talking about on Dogs is a person called Thomas Voxfire. Give his essays a read I think you will enjoy them

I'll definitely look him up and read a few of his pieces. Thanks

I'll let you know my thoughts on here after I've had a little browse.

northern-star wrote:El the Thelema author I was talking about on Dogs is a person called Thomas Voxfire. Give his essays a read I think you will enjoy them

I have done, and found the man to be a veritable fool.

I've chosen one to demonstrate why:

Consider of these words: fuck… shit… piss… crap… ****… prick… asshole… cocksucker… motherfucker… What do they have in common?
First and foremost, our society considers them bad, dirty, obscene and so on.

Wrong. Only by some are they considered to be 'bad, dirty, obscene and so on', but by many including authors, playwrights, workmen, children, pensioners and many others they are the parts of everyday language. These words are used more than any others by teenagers. They are not aberrations of speech, but the backbone of modern day talk employed by teenagers and some adults, such as you'll find on badly moderated forums. Personally, I think the words lack sophistication, and are merely aids to those without the wherewithal of strong diction.

These are words one does not use in “polite” company. These are words men should not use around women. These are words adults should not use around children. These are words that women should not use at all.

Pontificating on what should and what should not be employed in modern day speech makes you look like a right prick, Thomas

Second, almost without exception, these words describe either body parts or body functions relating either to reproduction or the elimination of waste, both of which are perfectly natural processes. There are a few exceptions such as bastard and son-of-a-bitch, but even they relate to our parentage, hence to reproduction. (Goddamnit, on the other hand, is a religious curse and therefore completely outside the scope of this treatise.)

These words have evolved throughout the centuries and capture with clarity perfect insult for the uneducated. Evidence? They are employed in everyday speech throughout the entire globe.

Does this not strike you as somewhat odd? How did the process by which we replicate our species, and the various acrobatics and practices related to it, come to be considered dirty? If our parents hadn’t fucked, none of us would be here. And all of our fathers are, ipso facto, motherfuckers, arguably the baddest of all the bad words. Poor daddy, that his name should sink so low…

Simply by bemoaning the fate of 'poor daddy', suggests insults towards one parents is a devastating choice of insult, and this is why it is practised by uncouth people around the world.

And why is it perfectly fine to eat, but when it comes out the other end, it’s dirty? Were we not able to shit and piss, we would die from the accumulation of waste products inside of us. Not only that, but nature has designed our waste material to be the agency by which regeneration of the soil occurs so that new growth can occur. It is part of a cyclical system that allows life to continue. The same can be said for reproduction.

Digression is a weakness in argument, Thomas, and this paragraph does nothing to further your argument against swearing.

Again, is this not a strange way to look at that which sustains our life processes? Without pointing too long and hard a finger at certain institutions and ways of thinking both antiquated and obsolete, let us proceed to see if we can rectify this most grievous error in modern man’s thinking. How to make the bad words normal is the task to which we will address ourselves.

Another paragraph, which only at the end, touches upon the theme of argument, but does nothing to advance it.

Obviously, the answer lies in education. First, we as adults must educate ourselves as to the very real necessity of calling a halt to considering necessary life processes as dirty or bad.

Thomas now attempts to further his argument by looking at education. Let's see how the fellow can develop it?

Are we so shallow and sheltered that we cannot see what an extremely serious psychological situation we have created and maintained for a very long time? What is the effect on our minds of the viewpoint that sex and waste-elimination are bad. As Freud so clearly saw, this is the fundamental starting point of many of our neuroses and psychoses.

Hang on a minute, Thomas, weren't you just about to analyse the education of bad language? But instead you've wandered on to another pointless piece?


Next, we must educate our children. (Back on topic! Well done, Thomas!) If young children were exposed to and encouraged to use all of the so-called “bad” words, they would soon grow quite used to them and then the words themselves would become what they really are: colloquial expressions relating to necessary life processes. At first, there would be a hew and cry from those antiquated ones who shrink from life and seek to hide in silly flowery evasions of truth, but it would soon dissolve. The youngsters themselves might be slightly titillated at first if they knew they were doing something naughty, but this would quickly pass.

Children are exposed to bad language on a daily basis, Thomas, but don't change their 'bad language' even into adulthood. Take a common forum inhabited by adults and 'bad language is bandied around, take the football field and bad language is spitted, take the Royal Family and bad language is practised, especially by Princess Ann. Bad language does not, as you say, '..quickly pass.' On the contrary it holds fast to age.

It is not in the interests of real mental health to continue to allow this serious dichotomy of thinking and acting to continue. We must investigate and analyze this predicament in the cold light of reason and act to relieve ourselves and our children from this unnecessary and mentally restrictive mode of thought. It might be slightly painful at first to retrain ourselves about the open use of these “naughty sounds with meaning”, but, in the long run, we will all be better off if we allow ourselves the right to return to sanity, that is, the sanity which understands that normal, natural life processes are not “dirty” and the vernacular expressions which describe them are not “bad.”

Calling people who don't use 'bad language' sane, Thomas, insults nearly the whole population of the world.

Conclusion as to the merits of Thomas Voxfire's essays.

Thomas Voxfire is clearly a self deluded jumped up cock and prick.

I have to agree with you Shine, what a load of bollocks (oops...naughty word) At first I thought I was reading a child's story. Yep, he is a deluded prick.

Never heard of him before, never want to hear any of his twaddle (not a naughty word)again

I read a couple of his essays, and he reminds me of some weak undergraduate.