sonious (sonious) wrote,

Dr. Conway can be darlingly hypocritical sometimes

A discussion occurred centering around a quote in a livejournal, which was later deleted, as is the choice of a livejournal owner. However all choices have consequence, I decided to say what I really thought about the quote given the information I have on the quote's owner. The LJ owner decided that they didn't see hypocrisy because he was in agreement, and then it just built from there. Instead of boring you with details on the debate, I'll just post the quote and my initial thought as to why it I believe it shows hypocrisy .

"You're asking the wrong question. You're not supposed to ask who we are. You need to ask who we were. We were the fat kids. We were the awkward kids. We were the kids with the big thick glasses. We were the brainy kids. We were the kids who didn’t like sports. We were all of those kids who for some reason were told by our peers 'You don’t belong with us.'

Now, human beings, as we are social creatures, crave companionship. Some of us found companionship in the stars. The rest of us found the companionship that we so desperately needed in the happy, smiling, accepting faces of the cartoon characters that we saw on Saturday morning television.

Now, to answer your question, sir. Who we are is this. We are nothing more than adults who never forgot their old friends."

~Dr. Conway, 2008

My initial response was: "Your don't belong with us." ~Dr. Conway 2010 to Insane Kangaroo.

Of course the reason I believe that IK was banned is simply because he knew the laws of Pittsburg better then a police officer did, which is not a bad thing. But to Kage a person who knows the law and follows it, particularly if it's a controversial one(to him), is a reason that a person does not belong with furries.

I actually am not the biggest fan of gun RIGHTS, I do believe in gun PRIVILEGES though. There is a difference as rights are not supposed to be something that can be taken away for ANY reason. Privileges are something that can be taken away for a reason, usually supposed to be a VERY good one. Which is why I shake my head when people call voting a right, when it is a privilege because it can be taken away from you if you are convicted of a felony. When our forefathers first wrote the constitution a majority of the United States was like the far wilderness of Alaska today, guns were plain old necessary. Today in the lower 48 not so much. Though the gun side of the debate may disagree with me there, that is how I feel. That is my political stance on this issue.

I dislike talking about guns, just like I'm sure gay people are sick of talking about marriage. They'd rather just do it and get on with their lives, as I'm sure IK would have rather have gone to AC gone home and things have been Hunky Dorey. But this isn't such a world, because of politics.

IK has been accused of being political because he's going to protest, however the same people that say this would probably disagree if I said gay people are protesting the ban on gay marriage just to be political. "No," they would say, "they are doing it because the state is keeping them from doing so."

Now a private industry is not a state, but when they do something for reasons that seem political, the person protesting it is not the political one. So when someone put the argument out there that Kage decided to ban him because a furry con is not about politics, then I agreed and said Kage should step down to protest the fact that open carry is legal in Pittsburg, because that is apparently his issue here.

Responding to a political action with protest is seen as political these days, which is the very reason why politics in this country is so off, so to make it easier, here is the definition that probably should be adapted in discourse.

Political Action- An action done by an organization or group based on political beliefs and not based in the letter of evidence.

Reactionary Action- An action done in response to a political action, with evidence that said action is politically motivated.

Saying someone is a threat because they open carry a gun they are legally allowed to carry within the Pittsburg law is a political action. Saying someone is a threat because they broke Anthrocon's rules by open carrying in con space is not a political action but a reactionary one(but this did not occur, the former occurred, though is popularly propagated, and lying/misinformation is also a political action, purposeful or not). Protesting Anthrocon for taking a political action to say this person doesn't belong 'with us' here, is reactionary not political.

I hate to beat this dead horse with a stick, but the fact of the matter is I think people are confused on who I am and what I stand for. I have always used this journal in order to defend the victims of political action. Therefore all my comments usually fall along the lines of reactionary action. I am defensive, and not offenseive, which is why I was hesitant to go to someone else's journal and post that comment, I did not wish to cause undo stress on something that is not his fault.

You may think that furry should just be to forget all that shit, put aside politics, and I agree. So when a chair person at a convention doesn't in this case, and we say "Oh that's ok because the guns thing I didn't like anyway.", then we pretty much consent to a con chair doing anything they want based on any politics. To me Conway, yes was within his rights to do it, however to me it's just as stupid as banning a fur couple from a convention because they're gay and legally married, and the chair doesn't believe gays should be married. If Conway believes guns should not be open carried in Pittsburg then he should try to get that law changed in Pittsburg, not punish furs because they follow that law. Saying your opinion that such a political course of action is dumb is not political, it is reactionary.

If it was me banned from AC (which maybe it wouldn't because I don't open carry, or own a gun, but maybe it could since political reasons are now open season for a ban apparently), I wouldn't protest, simply because I think most of the damage has been done and all that needs to be proven about the board has been proven. Conway is the very person that in his childhood turned him away because they thought he was strange, just the fact that he did different things was strange. And I believe that alone, becoming the very thing you in your youth despised, is punishment enough.

Hopefully this will be that last time I have to make a post about this, but knowing how reactionary people can be to the reactionary believing it is political, will no doubt occur, as it always has, and unfortunately always will.

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.