Young Morrissey photo with Aunt Mary posted on Facebook

In a NYD t-shirt. Saw this posted on Facebook, thought some may be interested.

WxmMRKM.jpg




Post by MadeinSalford:

It was posted by the woman in the photo. Auntie Mary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Peterb

Well-Known Member
We could go back and forth endlessly, but let's not; it's tedious, not to mention annoying for those who have to read it. However, I stand firmly by my previous statements:

I said that you often use broad generalizations to express your opinions; you respond by proposing a theory that proximity to the stage at a Morrissey concert correlates to a person's physical features. Since beauty is personally and culturally subjective, that would be extremely difficult to qualify. I'm fairly certain you don't have any empirical evidence to support this theory. You end that thought by stating that I am undoubtedly included in that group. Again, this is a statement that can't be substantiated: you don't know what I look like, you don't know whether I attend his concerts, or where I prefer to sit/stand in a venue. The purpose of that remark was to make a personal attack on me. If you want to be viewed as the master of debate on this site, you need to be armed with facts, not irrational theories, conjecture, or personal insults.

I questioned your ability to 'debunk Morrissey' because, by definition, that would mean that you have provided some new and startling revelations that affect the collective opinion of the man. Your criticisms are not new; you've stated them repeatedly; in fact, you just listed them again in this post. More importantly, everyone here has access to the same information and will formulate their own opinions concerning Morrissey. Whether its positive, negative, or ambivalent, those opinions are usually quite steadfast, and no one else is likely to change them.

I stated that some of your posts suggest a level of insecurity, an opinion that others have also voiced. Your stock response is to tell us all how intelligent you are, how great your family life is, that you live in a posh neighborhood, that you have a great sex life (by the way, most females would probably agree that a man who admits that his only concern in the bedroom is what a woman can do to service him is probably not going to be a great lover). People get insults hurled at them constantly on this site (frequently by you) but you seem far more aggressive in your attempts to contest them. It may or may not be the case, but these protests read like desperate insecurity, as does your need to be the loudest voice and the poster with the definitive opinion on all things Morrissey.

You advise people to ignore you; yet, you go after others like a heat-seeking missile. You invite debate, then in the same sentence declare yourself the winner before the debate begins. I'm done with this thread, not because I'm avoiding your possible response but because this is last week's news and it's time to move on. In spite of our heated exchanges, I do hope that your health improves.

lynnda
Lynnda, my god, I never thought it possible.
You really don't get the Brummie schtick at all do you?
Honestly, that is possibly the saddest post I have ever read.
This is exactly what I meant when I said he's running rings around the lot of you.
Lynnda, you appear to be far too nice a person for all this.
Why not attack me? I'd be much easier to dismantle.
 

Anaesthesine

Angel of Distemper
Due respect and all that, but neither myself nor a number of posters here are 'projecting themselves onto Morrissey'.
If I may add, it's pretty arrogant of you to assume you can know such a thing.
As for the rest of the post, well it's a lot of words saying nothing.
You've had better moments on the forum.

Very few of us are enlightened or objective enough to escape our own prejudices, proclivities and ingrained points-of-view (myself included): in politics, art and love, we see things though our own unique lenses. We project. Science, law and philosophy are really the only ways we've tried to overcome that tendency, and philosophy often fails.

Every once in a while I will visit a fan site for someone whose music I've known and loved for ages. The amount of projection, vitriol, and deep personal animosity amazes me. The anger that folks regularly vent upon a singer or band that's unworthy of such attention is simply baffling (Morrissey is a great case-in-point). They hate the new album, the band has lost it, the singer is a sell-out, etc. etc. it's always the same story. In the real world people shrug, online they twist themselves into obsessive knots.

You are correct: not everyone here projects themselves onto Morrissey, but the lovers and the haters do, and the obsessive threads read more like psychoanalysis than musical appreciation.

Your tone is now unpleasant, peremptory and dismissive where once it was playful and engaging. Don't let the rot set in.
 

CrystalGeezer

My secret's my enzyme.
Very few of us are enlightened or objective enough to escape our own prejudices, proclivities and ingrained points-of-view (myself included): in politics, art and love, we see things though our own unique lenses. We project. Science, law and philosophy are really the only ways we've tried to overcome that tendency, and philosophy often fails.

Every once in a while I will visit a fan site for someone whose music I've known and loved for ages. The amount of projection, vitriol, and deep personal animosity amazes me. The anger that folks regularly vent upon a singer or band that's unworthy of such attention is simply baffling (Morrissey is a great case-in-point). They hate the new album, the band has lost it, the singer is a sell-out, etc. etc. it's always the same story. In the real world people shrug, online they twist themselves into obsessive knots.

You are correct: not everyone here projects themselves onto Morrissey, but the lovers and the haters do, and the obsessive threads read more like psychoanalysis than musical appreciation.

Your tone is now unpleasant, peremptory and dismissive where once it was playful and engaging. Don't let the rot set in.

:clap:
 

Peterb

Well-Known Member
Very few of us are enlightened or objective enough to escape our own prejudices, proclivities and ingrained points-of-view (myself included): in politics, art and love, we see things though our own unique lenses. We project. Science, law and philosophy are really the only ways we've tried to overcome that tendency, and philosophy often fails.

Every once in a while I will visit a fan site for someone whose music I've known and loved for ages. The amount of projection, vitriol, and deep personal animosity amazes me. The anger that folks regularly vent upon a singer or band that's unworthy of such attention is simply baffling (Morrissey is a great case-in-point). They hate the new album, the band has lost it, the singer is a sell-out, etc. etc. it's always the same story. In the real world people shrug, online they twist themselves into obsessive knots.

You are correct: not everyone here projects themselves onto Morrissey, but the lovers and the haters do, and the obsessive threads read more like psychoanalysis than musical appreciation.

Your tone is now unpleasant, peremptory and dismissive where once it was playful and engaging. Don't let the rot set in.
Nice post.
I will take note.
Apologies.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Very few of us are enlightened or objective enough to escape our own prejudices, proclivities and ingrained points-of-view (myself included): in politics, art and love, we see things though our own unique lenses. We project. Science, law and philosophy are really the only ways we've tried to overcome that tendency, and philosophy often fails.

No one is capable of being completely objective. We all start with a subject—ourselves. Even in eastern philosophy—though they fervently deny there is such as thing as 'self'—a person cannot think, feel, make decisions, or critiques without the self being a part of the picture. All film, food, art, and music critics critique from a place of subjectivity. Even you do. You choose to read about certain bands and genres and ignore others. We cannot consume all the culture out there. Our ignorance prevents us from being 'objective.' How do you know what you are missing? You don't even know what you don't know, most of the time.

Scientists may conduct their research using objective methods—quantitative research. But even then, the subjectivity is never left outside of the lab. What theory will they test? What area of research? Who did they study under? How much funding do they have for this research? How many assistants will they have? So many variables influence their 'science.' Objectivity is a goal. Not an absolute.

As far as philosophy goes, the more I learn about the different traditions and philosophers the more I see just how subjective the whole thing is. Philosophers are almost always egotistical and self-absorbed. And they build upon the works of other egotistical and self-absorbed thinkers. Objective? Hardly. Once a branch in philosophy becomes objective, it leaves the philosophy department. All sciences and mathematics were once branches of philosophy. "I think therefore I am," claims to assert an objective truth about reality—from a subjective position. :squiffy: Perhaps logic, physics, and mathematics are more in line with objectivity. But bring the mathematician, logician, and physicist into picture, and you have now contaminated anything that was once potentially pure, with subjectivity.

Law, objective? Never. Law is a construct. Constructed by human subjects. It was not something discovered. Some a priori entity. Like Plato's Forms. Even the concept of 'human rights' is a construct. Animal rights? A construct. Justice? A construct. Fairness? Depends on who you are asking. All completely subjective—constructed by subjects. Interpreted by subjects. The beauty of the Constitution of the United States is that it is NOT objective at all. It is a living and breathing document that is capable of changing with the times as the society and her subjects change. Subjects will interpret its contents differently to suit their needs. Brilliant, isn't it?! A perfect subjective construct. Perhaps objectivity is overrated. Even an illusion.

Every once in a while I will visit a fan site for someone whose music I've known and loved for ages. The amount of projection, vitriol, and deep personal animosity amazes me. The anger that folks regularly vent upon a singer or band that's unworthy of such attention is simply baffling (Morrissey is a great case-in-point). They hate the new album, the band has lost it, the singer is a sell-out, etc. etc. it's always the same story. In the real world people shrug, online they twist themselves into obsessive knots.

I don't think that is projecting. Not in a psychological sense. Are you saying they hate themselves and so they project this hate upon the artist(s)? They are misogynistic so they project misogyny onto Morrissey? They are uncomfortable with their own sexuality so they claim Morrissey is uncomfortable with his? This is a cop-out and seems to be a convenient way to dismiss all criticism. What kind of criticism is objective—enough? I know I am not projecting my feelings about myself onto Morrissey. Are the 'haters?' Perhaps some of the deranged haters online—somewhere. I honesty don't see any of those types on this website, at all. I DO, however, see some of the comments and attitudes of the 'positive obsessives' as seriously problematic and three miles from reality. Pure subjectivity. And projection.


You are correct: not everyone here projects themselves onto Morrissey, but the lovers and the haters do, and...

How? Can you give me a few examples? What are the haters projecting? Studies have shown that the notion of the bully bullying because he hates himself and projects this hate onto his victims is erroneous. Many bullies have very high self-esteems. Are actually narcissists. Even psychopaths. They are not projecting self-hate onto others. They are toying with someone else for pleasure. For fun. Because they like it. We want to believe that all haters hate themselves and are broken in some way. Not always the case. Not even often the case. And do you really think the posters here are 'haters'? I don't.

Are you a hater? A lover? Neither? I would say I am neither of those two things. I would also suggest there are more 'lovers' here than 'haters.' Way more. And, I would argue if there is any projecting going on it is coming from that camp. Read the, Does Moz hate his female fans? thread. And Who is Tina Dehghani? Numerous heterosexual female fans, who claim to have read Morrissey's Autobiography, exhibit a complete denial of the misogynistic and homosexual content in the book. They don't WANT to believe those things. So they don't see them. Willful ignorance. That IS projecting a worldview, sexual orientation, values, etc., onto a person—Morrissey. He is what they want him to be. Not what he says he is or shows himself to be through his actions and comments in the press. It doesn't help that Morrissey has made it easier for his American hetero female fans to remain in their delusional states now that he has edited out the 'gay' parts from his book. Should he publish a special edition for his radical feminist fans so that they too don't have to struggle with cognitive dissonance? Edit out the misogynistic tidbits? Protect your fan base by protecting your image. If there would have been as much talk of the misogyny found in Autobiography, in the reviews and press, as there was of homosexuality, you better believe those misogynist parts would also have been absent in the US edition as well. But as we all know, sexism and misogyny are so pervasive and ingrained in our culture, that some—most—can't even see these things when they are staring them in the face. See those two previously mentioned threads for evidence to back this claim.

It is all a construct folks. He will let you see what he wants you to see. Image. Damage control. It is hilarious. And kind of sad. But... brilliant. That cannot be denied. He knows his fans all too well. He created them after all, didn't he? Morrissey constructed his own fan base. Perhaps like no other.

The 'haters' here are in the minority. I would even argue there are none. The 'lovers' clearly outnumber the 'haters.'

'Haters' has lost meaning from overuse and misuse. A pejorative word. Notice how its counterpart is not a pejorative term? 'Lover' is sweet and positive and conjures up things like goodness and peace and beauty—all lovely things. I prefer the term sycophant instead of lover. Because truly that is a more accurate description of the obsessive fan who is projecting, in denial, and completely subjective. I think if you are going to label some fans as haters, you must label their opposites as sycophants—not lovers.

...the obsessive threads read more like psychoanalysis than musical appreciation.

I think this has a lot to do with the fact that Moz's musical output has been slim pickings as of late. What is on offer to discuss? Not much. Certainly nothing new. Whereas we had a a 450 page book about THE MAN to dissect, analyze, speculate, critique. And all his comments in the press and statements on TTY—an endless supply of content to mull over. Of course many of us became armchair analysts. That was what we had to work with. The book revealed little about the music and much more about the person. Plus some of us are more fascinated with the persona of Moz than his music—at this point in his career. The song remains the same. How many times can we dissect a piece of music? Or lyrics? New fans can and will, of course. But for us long-term fans? Been there, done that. The music is static. The man is dynamic. Much more interesting to discuss, I think. But that is just me. Can we have both types of discussions here? I say yes, we can, and should.
 
Last edited:

Anaesthesine

Angel of Distemper
No one is capable of being completely objective. We all start with a subject—ourselves. Even in eastern philosophy—though they fervently deny there is such as thing as 'self'—a person cannot think, feel, make decisions, or critiques without the self being a part of the picture. All film, food, art, and music critics critique from a place of subjectivity. Even you do. You choose to read about certain bands and genres and ignore others. We cannot consume all the culture out there. Our ignorance prevents us from being 'objective.' How do you know what you are missing? You don't even know what you don't know, most of the time.

Scientists may conduct their research using objective methods—quantitative research. But even then, the subjectivity is never left outside of the lab. What theory will they test? What area of research? Who did they study under? How much funding do they have for this research? How many assistants will they have? So many variables influence their 'science.' Objectivity is a goal. Not an absolute.

As far as philosophy goes, the more I learn about the different traditions and philosophers the more I see just how subjective the whole thing is. Philosophers are almost always egotistical and self-absorbed. And they build upon the works of other egotistical and self-absorbed thinkers. Objective? Hardly. Once a branch in philosophy becomes objective, it leaves the philosophy department. All sciences and mathematics were once branches of philosophy. "I think therefore I am," claims to assert an objective truth about reality—from a subjective position. :squiffy: Perhaps logic, physics, and mathematics are more in line with objectivity. But bring the mathematician, logician, and physicist into picture, and you have now contaminated anything that was once potentially pure, with subjectivity.

Law, objective? Never. Law is a construct. Constructed by human subjects. It was not something discovered. Some a priori entity. Like Plato's Forms. Even the concept of 'human rights' is a construct. Animal rights? A construct. Justice? A construct. Fairness? Depends on who you are asking. All completely subjective—constructed by subjects. Interpreted by subjects. The beauty of the Constitution of the United States is that it is NOT objective at all. It is a living and breathing document that is capable of changing with the times as the society and her subjects change. Subjects will interpret its contents differently to suit their needs. Brilliant, isn't it?! A perfect subjective construct. Perhaps objectivity is overrated. Even an illusion.



I don't think that is projecting. Not in a psychological sense. Are you saying they hate themselves and so they project this hate upon the artist(s)? They are misogynistic so they project misogyny onto Morrissey? They are uncomfortable with their own sexuality so they claim Morrissey is uncomfortable with his? This is a cop-out and seems to be a convenient way to dismiss all criticism. What kind of criticism is objective—enough? I know I am not projecting my feelings about myself onto Morrissey. Are the 'haters?' Perhaps some of the deranged haters online—somewhere. I honesty don't see any of those types on this website, at all. I DO, however, see some of the comments and attitudes of the 'positive obsessives' as seriously problematic and three miles from reality. Pure subjectivity. And projection.




How? Can you give me a few examples? What are the the haters projecting? Studies have shown that the notion of the bully bullying because he hates himself and projects this hate onto his victims is erroneous. Many bullies have very high self-esteems. Are actually narcissists. Even psychopaths. They are not projecting self-hate onto others. They are toying with someone else for pleasure. For fun. Because they like it. We want to believe that all haters hate themselves and are broken in some way. Not always the case. Not even often the case. And do you really think the posters here are 'haters'? I don't.

Are you a hater? A lover? Neither? I would say I am neither of those two things. I would also suggest there are more 'lovers' here than 'haters.' Way more. And, I would argue if there is any projecting going on it is coming from that camp. Read the, Does Moz hate his female fans? thread. And Who is Tina Dehghani? Numerous heterosexual female fans, who claim to have read Morrissey's Autobiography, exhibit a complete denial of the misogynistic and homosexual content in the book. They don't WANT to believe those things. So they don't see them. Willful ignorance. That IS projecting a worldview, sexual orientation, values, etc., onto a person—Morrissey. He is what they want him to be. Not what he says he is or shows himself to be through his actions and comments in the press. It doesn't help that Morrissey has made it easier for his American hetero female fans to remain in their delusional states now that he has edited out the 'gay' parts from his book. Should he publish a special edition for his radical feminist fans so that they too don't have to struggle with cognitive dissonance? Edit out the misogynistic tidbits? Protect your fan base by protecting your image. If there would have been as much talk of the misogyny found in Autobiography, in the reviews and press, as there was of homosexuality, you better believe those misogynist parts would also have been absent in the US edition as well. But as we all know, sexism and misogyny are so pervasive and ingrained in our culture, that some—most—can't even see these things when they are staring them in the face. See those two previously mentioned threads for evidence to back this claim.

It is all a construct folks. He will let you see what he wants you to see. Image. Damage control. It is hilarious. And kind of sad. But... brilliant. That cannot be denied. He knows his fans all too well. He created them after all, didn't he? Morrissey constructed his own fan base. Perhaps like no other...

From Aristotle to Morrissey is a big stretch when one is sick in bed, so I'll just say this to clarify (and I hope to make sense through the nausea): when we come into contact with someone or something we love or find beautiful, we open up and connect to it on a profound level. That connection is another thing, part us and part other. It's profound, singular and it makes life worth living. We experience what others experience, and we experience something unique. That is one aspect of art - it is both a bridge and mirror. We see our anger, our joy, our pain, our loss, our truth. Great performers are able to tap into that process, and make us feel a bond. Their pain becomes our pain, etc. That is what I mean by "projection." I'm not speaking in a strictly Freudian sense.

There are many reasons to love Morrissey, and many reasons to dislike him immensely. Online, where one has the ability to involve oneself in a non-stop, semi-anonymous microanalysis of anything and everything, this conversation often turns into an opportunity to vent personal issues and go off on tangents that have little connection to the subject at hand. That's fine: I don't begrudge anyone their Moz disappointments - I'm disappointed myself. Working out issues online easily spills into crazyville, however, for certain folks who cannot seem to separate their own issues from the matter at hand. That's when clear breaks from reality make themselves evident, words become quite useless, and things turn nasty.

Most folks who post here have a certain fondness for Morrissey (that's me). Some are disappointed (that's me, too). Some are still in love and others seem to be addicted to their own endless feelings of rejection and retribution. Personally, I love the art but not the man, who appears to be quite imperfect (as all men and women are). I feel that I understand where he's coming from because (inexplicably and perhaps unfortunately enough), he's still relevant to my life experience. That form of personal projection goes on. When the bad overwhelms the good I'll just turn away, as I've done before.

As for the larger picture: attempts to be objective via rigidly constructed systems are rooted in ancient notions of rationality and enlightenment, an attempt to organize a framework that will provide social stability in an uncertain, chaotic world. Law and science are thus codified, and philosophy is a form of complex and beautiful (solitary) microanalysis. The first is as objective as flawed humans can be, the second is often corrupted, and the third is most laudable fodder for endless analysis by each of us in search of truth (that's my succinctly flawed understanding of it, anyway).

All these are heady topics for a thread about a childhood picture of a pop singer (cute kid, too). Morrissey still attracts interesting people with interesting things to say. You seem restless, RB. Good luck to you in your omnivorous search for meaning (and I say that in all earnestness). :)
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
From Aristotle to Morrissey is a big stretch when one is sick in bed, so I'll just say this to clarify (and I hope to make sense through the nausea):

First off, I hope you feel better soon.

...when we come into contact with someone or something we love or find beautiful, we open up and connect to it on a profound level. That connection is another thing, part us and part other. It's profound, singular and it makes life worth living. We experience what others experience, and we experience something unique. That is one aspect of art - it is both a bridge and mirror. We see our anger, our joy, our pain, our loss, our truth. Great performers are able to tap into that process, and make us feel a bond. Their pain becomes our pain, etc. That is what I mean by "projection." I'm not speaking in a strictly Freudian sense.

Sounds like empathy more than projection. Agree with art connecting us to our humanity. A great film does this for me more than anything.

There are many reasons to love Morrissey, and many reasons to dislike him immensely. Online, where one has the ability to involve oneself in a non-stop, semi-anonymous microanalysis of anything and everything, this conversation often turns into an opportunity to vent personal issues and go off on tangents that have little connection to the subject at hand. That's fine: I don't begrudge anyone their Moz disappointments - I'm disappointed myself. Working out issues online easily spills into crazyville, however, for certain folks who cannot seem to separate their own issues from the matter at hand. That's when clear breaks from reality make themselves evident, words become quite useless, and things turn nasty.

Maybe I am desensitized to it. I just don't feel the hate. I sense passionate debate. And disappointment. It just doesn't seem malicious. I honestly don't think anyone has an agenda. I think they have strong opinions. And they enjoy expressing them. Maybe they do it for fun--pleasure. Maybe they are quite serious and feel compelled to share their 'truth.' It just doesn't rattle my chain. I am more annoyed by the blind admiration than the hate speech. The latter scares me. Touches a nerve. Brings to mind all sorts of unpleasant things like religious devotion, fascism, and totalitarianism.

Most folks who post here have a certain fondness for Morrissey (that's me). Some are disappointed (that's me, too). Some are still in love and others seem to be addicted to their own endless feelings of rejection and retribution. Personally, I love the art but not the man, who appears to be quite imperfect (as all men and women are). I feel that I understand where he's coming from because (inexplicably and perhaps unfortunately enough), he's still relevant to my life experience. That form of personal projection goes on. When the bad overwhelms the good I'll just turn away, as I've done before.

As for the larger picture: attempts to be objective via rigidly constructed systems are rooted in ancient notions of rationality and enlightenment, an attempt to organize a framework that will provide social stability in an uncertain, chaotic world. Law and science are thus codified, and philosophy is a form of complex and beautiful (solitary) microanalysis. The first is as objective as flawed humans can be, the second is often corrupted, and the third is most laudable fodder for endless analysis by each of us in search of truth (that's my succinctly flawed understanding of it, anyway).

Sounds reasonable and correct to me. I would not dispute any part of that.

All these are heady topics for a thread about a childhood picture of a pop singer (cute kid, too). Morrissey still attracts interesting people with interesting things to say. You seem restless, RB. Good luck to you in your omnivorous search for meaning (and I say that in all earnestness). :)


Omnivorous search for meaning? Does it need to be an omnivorous search? How about just, search? ;) Always searching for understanding. Meaning is a bonus. Restless? Always. It is an insatiable drive. Learning is a lifelong process.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
I've never seen blind admiration on Morrissey Solo. Honestly. Name these blind admirers. I don't get it.

Are you paying attention? There are countless examples littered throughout the forums. Some by regulars, some by causal, infrequent posters, and some by anonymous persons. Name names? No.

i·dol·ize (īd′l-īz′)
tr.v. i·dol·ized, i·dol·iz·ing, i·dol·iz·es
1. To regard with blind admiration or devotion.
2. To worship as an idol.
i′dol·i·za′tion (-ĭ-zā′shən) n.
i′dol·iz′er n.

Those who idolize Morrissey regard him with blind admiration. They are not lovers. Or even necessarily all sycophants. They are idolizers. That is THE new term. The opposite of hater is idolizer.
 
Last edited:
A

Anonymous

Guest
Are you paying attention? There are countless examples littered throughout the forums. Some by regulars, some by causal, infrequent posters, and some by anonymous persons. Name names? No.

i·dol·ize (īd′l-īz′)
tr.v. i·dol·ized, i·dol·iz·ing, i·dol·iz·es
1. To regard with blind admiration or devotion.
2. To worship as an idol.
i′dol·i·za′tion (-ĭ-zā′shən) n.
i′dol·iz′er n.

Those who idolize Morrissey regard him with blind admiration. They are not lovers. Or even necessarily all sycophants. They are idolizers. That is THE new term. The opposite of hater is idolizer.

I know what the word means, but I just don't see blind admiration taking place. I see people talking about it, but I never see it happening.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
I know what the word means, but I just don't see blind admiration taking place. I see people talking about it, but I never see it happening.

I feel that way about the 'hating.' I hear people bitching about it but I don't see it. I certainly don't feel hate for Morrissey. Not that anyone has called me a hater. But others get called that. And I disagree with that assessment. I feel personally hated more than I feel Moz is hated by the posters here. Maybe that is why this 'hating' doesn't seem all that hateful to me. I have been called worse things, in other words. Morrissey might disagree. Maybe he would feel hated by people here. Do you think he would also feel the blind admiration? Doesn't he foster that type of fan? Reward her? Julia. Margaret Dale.

I guess I could provide some examples of posts. But I bet you still would not be convinced. Are you just claiming that this type of fan does not post here? Or that they don't exist at all? They do exist. And some have posted here in the past and some still do.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I feel that way about the 'hating.' I hear people bitching about it but I don't see it. I certainly don't feel hate for Morrissey. Not that anyone has called me a hater. But others get called that. And I disagree with that assessment. I feel personally hated more than I feel Moz is hated by the posters here. Maybe that is why this 'hating' doesn't seem all that hateful to me. I have been called worse things, in other words. Morrissey might disagree. Maybe he would feel hated by people here. Do you think he would also feel the blind admiration? Doesn't he foster that type of fan? Reward her? Julia. Margaret Dale.

I guess I could provide some examples of posts. But I bet you still would not be convinced. Are you just claiming that this type of fan does not post here? Or that they don't exist at all? They do exist. And some have posted here in the past and some still do.

Interesting. Maybe we're both right. Or wrong.
 
I feel that way about the 'hating.' I hear people bitching about it but I don't see it. I certainly don't feel hate for Morrissey. Not that anyone has called me a hater. But others get called that. And I disagree with that assessment. I feel personally hated more than I feel Moz is hated by the posters here. Maybe that is why this 'hating' doesn't seem all that hateful to me. I have been called worse things, in other words. Morrissey might disagree. Maybe he would feel hated by people here. Do you think he would also feel the blind admiration? Doesn't he foster that type of fan? Reward her? Julia. Margaret Dale.

I guess I could provide some examples of posts. But I bet you still would not be convinced. Are you just claiming that this type of fan does not post here? Or that they don't exist at all? They do exist. And some have posted here in the past and some still do.

You don't think brummieboy hates? Really? I think the vast majority on here would disagree with you on that, and barleycorn in his less sane moments definitely hates, wishing moz a slow painful death, calling him a c*** etc, etc
 

Johnny Barleycorn

Well-Known Member
You don't think brummieboy hates? Really? I think the vast majority on here would disagree with you on that, and barleycorn in his less sane moments definitely hates, wishing moz a slow painful death, calling him a c*** etc, etc

More wilful misrepresentation from IBS. Link please, bearing in mind I have the full text here should you be too cowardly to do so.

I don't hate Morrissey. Morrissey hates the world. I have little doubt he would loathe you and me equally. You for your endless sycophancy, me for my inability to prevent myself telling him what I thought of his more extreme views.

A couple of weeks ago I got a charming PM from someone who wanted my opinion for a dissertation. It was a very nice PM - I'm sure many of you got the same thing - essentially asking for my views on my relationship with Morrissey as a fan. It was a little more in-depth than that, but that was the gist.

To my shame I haven't replied, although I've sat down and tried to do so several times. In the end I came to the conclusion I have two diametrically opposed relationships. One with the singer, and one with the man. The former I want to hear more from, the latter i want to hear much, much less from. In fact, I don't want to hear a damn word from those lips unless there's a backing track. He is that unpleasant a human being. Before someone leaps in with a "How can you say you don't hate him, then?" I'd like to say I don't hate Kim Jong Un either. Nor would I wish to have dinner with him.

Hardly the stuff dissertations are made of, so if the sender of that PM reads this and thinks me terribly rude for not responding it wasn't that your questions fell on deaf ears. It was that they were extremely good.
 
More wilful misrepresentation from IBS. Link please, bearing in mind I have the full text here should you be too cowardly to do so.

I don't hate Morrissey. Morrissey hates the world. I have little doubt he would loathe you and me equally. You for your endless sycophancy, me for my inability to prevent myself telling him what I thought of his more extreme views.

A couple of weeks ago I got a charming PM from someone who wanted my opinion for a dissertation. It was a very nice PM - I'm sure many of you got the same thing - essentially asking for my views on my relationship with Morrissey as a fan. It was a little more in-depth than that, but that was the gist.

To my shame I haven't replied, although I've sat down and tried to do so several times. In the end I came to the conclusion I have two diametrically opposed relationships. One with the singer, and one with the man. The former I want to hear more from, the latter i want to hear much, much less from. In fact, I don't want to hear a damn word from those lips unless there's a backing track. He is that unpleasant a human being. Before someone leaps in with a "How can you say you don't hate him, then?" I'd like to say I don't hate Kim Jong Un either. Nor would I wish to have dinner with him.

Hardly the stuff dissertations are made of, so if the sender of that PM reads this and thinks me terribly rude for not responding it wasn't that your questions fell on deaf ears. It was that they were extremely good.
If you have the "full text" then check it out, you said exactly what I've accused you of, if this is the way you speak about someone you don't hate I can't even imagine what you would say about someone you do hate
 

Johnny Barleycorn

Well-Known Member
I feel that way about the 'hating.' I hear people bitching about it but I don't see it. I certainly don't feel hate for Morrissey. Not that anyone has called me a hater. But others get called that. And I disagree with that assessment. I feel personally hated more than I feel Moz is hated by the posters here. Maybe that is why this 'hating' doesn't seem all that hateful to me. I have been called worse things, in other words. Morrissey might disagree. Maybe he would feel hated by people here. Do you think he would also feel the blind admiration? Doesn't he foster that type of fan? Reward her? Julia. Margaret Dale.

I guess I could provide some examples of posts. But I bet you still would not be convinced. Are you just claiming that this type of fan does not post here? Or that they don't exist at all? They do exist. And some have posted here in the past and some still do.

The use of the word "haters" here, as with the rest of the internet, is an attempt to shut people up. Those who use it believe Morrissey is incapable of being wrong and is not subject to examination and, if necessary, criticism of his views and behaviour.

Justin Bieber and One Direction attract exactly the same sort of people. Followers rather than thinkers. Morrissey, like Bieber, made a conscious decision to put himself in the public eye. He then uses that sought position to tell us what is wrong with the world, but he and his more childlike supporters seem to think he should not be challenged.

I mentioned Kim Jong Un earlier. Morrissey's public persona and lifestyle seems to be run along similar lines. Agree or be disappeared within the camp, never to be seen again, disagree outside his jurisdiction and his creatures will be set loose to track you down.

eX9DD34.jpg
 

Kalmsa

New Member
I like the picture.

- - - Updated - - -

I like the picture, it's cute.

- - - Updated - - -

I like the picture, it's cute.

- - - Updated - - -

I like the picture, it's cute.

- - - Updated - - -

I like the picture, it's cute.

- - - Updated - - -

I like the picture, it's cute.
 

Wozzles

Member
I don't condone yer trolling, but THIS is REALLY funny. I have no words. This is REALLY genius. GENIUS.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm talking about Barleycorn's Photoshop Job. So funny.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
The use of the word "haters" here, as with the rest of the internet, is an attempt to shut people up. Those who use it believe Morrissey is incapable of being wrong and is not subject to examination and, if necessary, criticism of his views and behaviour.

Agree 100%.

Justin Bieber and One Direction attract exactly the same sort of people. Followers rather than thinkers. Morrissey, like Bieber, made a conscious decision to put himself in the public eye. He then uses that sought position to tell us what is wrong with the world, but he and his more childlike supporters seem to think he should not be challenged.

That is it in a nutshell. The root of the problem. Blind admiration.


I mentioned Kim Jong Un earlier. Morrissey's public persona and lifestyle seems to be run along similar lines. Agree or be disappeared within the camp, never to be seen again, disagree outside his jurisdiction and his creatures will be set loose to track you down.

eX9DD34.jpg

My way or the highway. Love that pic. Worse thing Morrissey has said lately is this... "If I'm introduced to anyone who eats beings, I walk away." It's crass. judgmental, irrational, and a flat out lie. He interacts and works with meat eaters all the time. He doesn't live completely in a bubble. Though it often seems he is as close to it as humanly possible. Is Joseph Chiccarelli vegetarian? Anyone know?

How Morrissey can condemn the whole flesh eating world while being a contributor to the suffering he cries out against, is beyond absurdity. That he doesn't see it makes me wonder what is going on in that man's head. I mean seriously.

"The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference. The opposite of art is not ugliness, it's indifference. The opposite of faith is not heresy, it's indifference. And the opposite of life is not death, it's indifference.” ~ Elie Weisel

I'd add, the opposite of passion is indifference.

The idolizers have passion. The critics have passion. No one feels indifferent. We wouldn't be here if we did.

Not lovers and haters. Idiolizers and critics.

The word hater is overused and misused--it's a cop-out--a convenient way to dismiss all criticism.
 

realitybites

making lemonade
Subscriber
Interesting. Maybe we're both right. Or wrong.

Maybe. Maybe a little of both? I guess we really cannot know what people feel and what motivates them. Maybe they don't even always know themselves. We can only speculate based upon the evidence--what they say they think and feel. Words don't paint the whole picture though, do they?
 
Top Bottom