ellauri106.html on line 255: Who are Philip Roth´s ex-wives Claire Bloom and Margaret Martinson? Have they got anything in common? I bet they were spitting images of Phil´s mother, one way or another. Roth was married twice – to Margaret Martinson from 1959 to 1963. He met Martinson in 1956 and married her three years later. Roth claims she used someone else’s urine sample to persuade him she was pregnant and trick him into marriage.
ellauri106.html on line 273: Roth claimed his first wife, Margaret Martinson, used someone else’s urine sample to persuade him she was pregnant and trick him into marrying her.
ellauri159.html on line 621: Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much. So if you have not been trustworthy in handling worldly wealth, who will trust you with true riches? And if you have not been trustworthy with someone else’s property, who will give you property of your own?
ellauri159.html on line 1010: Ts prefer to use their thinking function when making decisions. They place more emphasis on the rule of logic than on the effect that actions have on people. They tend to be skeptical in evaluating ideas, whether their own or someone else’s.
ellauri159.html on line 1145: You like to bring a high level of mental energy (well, at least some energy, like energy drinks) to the project. You enjoy taking risks and may need the pressure of a deadline (or a dead body) to complete your tasks. No need to write according to someone else’s schedule, unless they have more powerful firearms.
ellauri159.html on line 1217: You work best in a quiet environment where they won’t be interrupted, thanx to the I. LIkewise, you like autonomy so you can perfect your writing according to yourr own high standard without having to follow someone else’s low standard.
ellauri219.html on line 803: Hegemony means that the rest of the world is going to resent you, no matter what you do, because they cannot get away from being sat upon by you, and people don’t like someone else’s ideas and culture and politics and culture wars impinging on their own.
ellauri254.html on line 401: ‘To my great dismay, today I discovered that your tail came from my perineum (actually not mine, someone else’s – that’s the problem!). Moreover, I cannot find the rear paws. Have they really been cut off? Where shall I look for them? I await your reply. I’ve taken the skin to be fixed – but how ever can I return it with patches?’
ellauri375.html on line 102: Why do Westerners like to eat the meat of pigs, a ḥarām animal, and use its fur? Because we couldn’t give even half a single flying fuck what your religion has to say about anything, because we don’t follow your religion. Pork products are nutritious and tasty and we want to eat them so we’ll bloody well do what all we like. We really don’t need someone else’s fairy stories to dictate what we should have for dinner.
xxx/ellauri085.html on line 234: Until I got out of it and realize that was not my dream, it was someone else’s dream. Change something.
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 202: The author of Who Owns Culture? Appropriation and Authenticity in American Law, Susan Scafidi, a law professor at Fordham University who for the record is white, defines cultural appropriation as “taking intellectual property, traditional knowledge, cultural expressions, or artifacts from someone else’s culture without permission. This can include unauthorised use of another culture’s dance, dress, music, language, folklore, cuisine, traditional medicine, religious symbols, etc.”
xxx/ellauri103.html on line 264: Now I proceed to the topic "The left’s embrace of gotcha hypersensitivity inevitably invites backlash." Why, it’s largely in order to keep from losing my fictional mojo that I stay off Facebook and Twitter, which could surely install an instinctive self-censorship out of fear of attack. Ten years ago, I gave the opening address of this same festival, in which I maintained that fiction writers have a vested interest in protecting everyone’s right to offend others – because if hurting someone else’s feelings even inadvertently is sufficient justification for muzzling, there will always be someone out there who is miffed by what you say, and freedom of speech is dead. Why, freedom of speech is just about miffing! What's the use of the freedom if you are not allowed to miff! With the rise of identity politics, which privileges a subjective sense of injury as actionable basis for prosecution, that is a battle that in the decade since I last spoke in Brisbane we’ve been losing.
xxx/ellauri157.html on line 66: You can’t just write and write and put things in a drawer. They wither without the warm sun of someone else’s appreciation. When I cannot write a poem, I eat biscuits and feel just as pleased.
xxx/ellauri165.html on line 580: Yes, the virgin fixation is puzzling. I expect it has something to do with women as property and the importance of verifying lineage. Yes I have a pet theory (hypothesis) that in civilizations where we lived in large numbers and with animals diseases could bounce from people to animals and back again hence all the plagues. In cultures where people were relatively isolated then virginity doesn’t seem to play as big a role. Mind you if you are paying for a wife to raise your children who you see as the primary reason for your existence then not raising someone else’s children may be a prime issue.
xxx/ellauri179.html on line 330: “now I am a boy … You see why it’s dangerous, don’t you? … Why do we have to go by everyone else’s rules? We’re us … Please understand and love me … I am Peter … You’re my beautiful lovely Catherine.”
xxx/ellauri229.html on line 156: Someone asked the Rabbit “Is whataboutism always fallacious?“ Here’s my reply: Bringing up someone else’s hypocrisy across cases is not fallacious in and of itself. It’s fallacious if the hypocrisy is irrelevant to their being alt-right.
16