Grace Lavery / Joseph Lavery & Daniel M. Lavery / Mallory Ortberg - "Straight with extra steps" couple trooning out to avoid "dwindling into mere heterosexuality"

[David Glowie]

I'm gay, I have long been aware by reading, of really digusting gay subcultures. Fistings and 70s depraved Mapplethorpe stuff. I'm really just sick and tired of heterosexual autogynephile dry drunk former addict Joe fucking Lavery trying to be edgy saying all gay men love the worst ugliest depravity. Or speaking of gay people at all, he's married to a testosteroned hog of a woman. Fuck him, he has no authority to speak, he is yet another heterosexual "queer" ruining the fuck out of what gay men and lesbians spent over a century to build. Just a poseur fucking loudmouth exiled to Michigan who IS NOT GAY. But definitely a cunt.

From what I know of the gay men who are into "really disgusting gay subcultures", heterosexual looky-loo tourists are the LAST thing they want.

 

[Bookwork]

Joe is so angry at someone called Charlotte Gill because ?

She is a British foe of wokedom who's too attractive to sext with Joe. https://www.charlottegillart.com/ - "I am a freelance journalist, currently writing for The Sunday Telegraph, I Paper and Mail on Sunday."

"Curator-in-Chief" of @WokeWaste on X, 1.3k followers, where she skewers wasteful spending by the UK gov and disrespects wokey malarkey. Also @CharlotteCGill.

And so we come to her challenging the million-pound-plus funding of a professor specializing in gay "pig" masculinities and Taxpayer Joe finding the man's work rigorous, useful, necessary, and important. Starts here. ETA - Her related Substack article and its decoction into a @WokeWaste thread.

Followers of C Gill found Joe's position asinine *ahem*, perhaps because they did not know he counts on taxpayers' money for his misunderstanding of sit com episodes and therefore feels personally threatened by the Gillians' cost-cutting yen.

There is so much. I cannot capture it all. Go there and enjoy the Gillians' KFesque repartee.


ETA 2 - The abstract of the scholarly work under discussion elucidates how past studies have "privileged" activist organizations' contributions rather than examining activist media.

To address that scholarly gap, "The Europe that Gay Porn Built, 1945-2000" will map for the first time the European networks of production, circulation and consumption of gay erotica and porn magazines published between the end of WWII and the turn of the 21st century, and build on them to develop a cultural study of "Europe" as imagined by gay men. We will do so in three key innovative ways: (1) by exploring how the gay sexual imaginary mediated by print gay porn cultures will have catalysed new and likely conflicting ways for gay men across Europe to imagine both one another and their non-European others. (2) by investigating the resonances and dissonances within and between that pan-European gay sexual imaginary and the Europeanist imaginary being advanced by political institutions. (3) by focusing on the erotics of "homoeuropeanism" to interrogate what we talk (or don't talk) about when we talk about "Europe." At a time when nationalisms and euro-scepticism is gaining political momentum across the continent, the project will offer a new important vantage point from where to think "Europe" through unveiling how the latter was imagined and erotically iterated by a minoritised community that would eventually be embraced by European institutions themselves as a way of defining the exceptionality of Europe against its others.

tl;dr - EU major domo is globohomo. Now with pix.

 

[AMHOLIO]

Joe is so angry at someone called Charlotte Gill because ? and also, the disgusting scat-fuckpig culture of some depraved homosexuals is just as important as Shakespeare to teach young students. Anyone opposing this being taught is just homophobic because everyone knows all gay men love to wallow in filth and degradation. Honestly, Joe is one of the most virulently anti-gay shitbirds ever with this garbage.
View attachment 6083020View attachment 6083021View attachment 6083022

He really must love upperclass British ideals if he writes a whole thread on the merrit of fucking pigs. Is that too much of a stretch?

Or speaking of gay people at all, he's married to a testosteroned hog of a woman. Fuck him, he has no authority to speak, he is yet another heterosexual "queer" ruining the fuck out of what gay men and lesbians spent over a century to build. Just a poseur fucking loudmouth exiled to Michigan who IS NOT GAY. But definitely a cunt.

He has nothing but "lesbian" experiences, which is very charitable, and I don't think he's ever expressed interest in pleasuring penises outside his own. The gayest he gets is going in front of the mirror and saying to himself, "would you fuck me? I'd fuck me. I'd fuck me hard."

And so we come to her challenging the million-pound-plus funding of a professor specializing in gay "pig" masculinities and Taxpayer Joe finding the man's work rigorous, useful, necessary, and important. Starts here. ETA - Her related Substack article.

He's a professional at inserting his foot into his mouth while his head is stuck up his ass at this point, got to give him that.

 

[MirnaMinkoff]

From what I know of the gay men who are into "really disgusting gay subcultures", heterosexual looky-loo tourists are the LAST thing they want.

In the 1970’s all the wealthy rich socialites in NYC used to go gawk at the most degenerate gay hotspots after dinner, drinks and cocaine at the upscale hotspots. CZ Guest would go down to the Mineshaft so Truman could explain all this leather fisting stuff like it was an anthropological expedition with lots of booze, cocaine and naked men.

The leather daddies didn’t like being a stop on bored rich ppl’s degenerate urban safari, but it was tolerated. I mean maybe one of their rich closeted husbands would sneak back a few days later to be violated and pissed on.

I think Joe is a wanna-be fag hag socialite. He’s not gay, and even if he’s bi, he’s too unattractive and fat to garner any sexual attention in these gay scenes so he has to settle for being a “supportive fanboy” on the sidelines. I think his main purpose in the queer sphere is to be the straight guy there to creep on the fag hags and straight “female allies”. Given the types of women we are dealing with they obviously like gay men and enjoy socializing with them, so Joe affecting a queer persona is useful bait to get the attention of these women. Case in point: Lilly and Mallory. It also is good cover for his raging narcissistic tendencies and utter failures as a man.

 

[AMHOLIO]

I think his main purpose in the queer sphere is to be the straight guy there to creep on the fag hags and straight “female allies”. Given the types of women we are dealing with they obviously like gay men and enjoy socializing with them, so Joe affecting a queer persona is useful bait to get the attention of these women. Case in point: Lilly and Mallory. It also is good cover for his raging narcissistic tendencies and utter failures as a man.

God, he's worse than leeches and lampreys. He's like the intestinal worm no one likes.

 

[A Sentient Cloud]

More specifically, Jim's with Karen at the time after both move to Stanton from Stamford when that branch closes. A few episodes prior he reveals to Karen his feelings for Pam so he definitely couldn't go to her art show. And in the prior episode to the art show one, Pam goes back to Roy and gives him a second chance because of her reaction to Phyllis getting married after Pam had called hers off over Jim. It had been previously established that Roy doesn't care about Pam's art and blows off many things she wants for things he wants instead. Most notably, Roy spent their wedding money on Jet Skis, in the episode after this one where Roy reveals they had to sell them at a loss and blows off Pam to get drunk which eventually leads to the bar trashing and attack on Jim.

Joe perhaps was under the impression that such a popular with normies show doesn't have overarching plots and character development that's relevant to what happens.

It's more broadly hilarious that anyone could think Michael Scott was the father figure of The Office.

Even better, a late series episode reveals that Roy thrived after his breakup with Pam. He's portrayed as the quintessential stereotypical normie cishet white dudebro, and yet a traditional heterosexual relationship was stifling for him as well. He ends up marrying a woman who is a successful business owner in her own right.

Fuck, I think I might kind of like The Office.

 

[monstrous bubo]

Deep breath… Joe has a point.

The fundamental question is what is the point of the humanities? An early 19th century scholar may well have said something along the lines of this: by studying the highest and finest creations of the mind, we can improves ourselves, individually and as a society. Those highest and finest creations of the mind could certainly deal with base or ignoble matters, but in a manner that could elevate us. This of course is a direct descendant of the Ancient Greek concept of tragedy as catharsis. Those scholars might be at universities, but could also be people with sufficient private means to pursue their interests.

Fast forward to the 20th century. Mass primary and secondary education, more students, more universities and other institutions of higher learning, and an explosion of mass literacy leading to a mass popular culture. This democratisation of the production of knowledge, the explosion in scholars trying to mine the same old canonical works to less and less effect, made competition more naked. A scholarly career in the humanities thus required some innovation. Enter the theory wars. The telos was no longer to elevate the mind, but more to understand it (note the popularity of Freud and later Lacan in the academy), or at least paint a picture of how and why we create cultural products. This made the humanities effectively a type of sociology. If that is its aim, than even grappling with aesthetics or the moral value of the arts is not only irrelevant; it is a covert way to create illegitimate hierarchies between certain knowledge workers and the poor lumpen masses. This gesturing towards anti-elitism is of course completely exploded by the incestuous verbiage in which it is expressed, whatever the theoretical framework or fashion adopted by the scholar. The consumer of the cultural product cannot understand the analysis offered by the academy. It also threw open the doors to the analysis of anything, because even the stupidest pop song tells us something about the society which produced it. And unlike the study of the best in cultural products, there is no risk of exhaustion, because new rubbish and newish theories can be produced ad infinitum.

Against that background, and in the industry in which he competes, Joe is absolutely correct. It is much easier to find something novel to say about post-war gay porn in Europe than it is about Hamlet, and all the incentives are for the former.

The preceding is not meant to be a comprehensive analysis, more late night sperging, so I welcome further discussion from fellow Farmers, especially those with more insight into the history of the humanities and current drivers in western academia.

 

[A Sentient Cloud]

Deep breath… Joe has a point.

Of course you're right, and in principle I don't have a problem with Joe as a scholar, if he's publishing then his analyses can be refuted or built upon and I don't think there is anything that isn't worth discussing from a scholarly standpoint. Stupid or wrongheaded analysis can be valuable, too. If he were "just" a Gender Studies guy with a background in Shakespeare he wouldn't be a lolcow. His academic output is the least offensive aspect of him.

 

[AMHOLIO]

and in principle I don't have a problem with Joe as a scholar,

His academic output is the least offensive aspect of him.

I do, everything I read from him is a crime of dumping word vomit on a page while huffing his own farts. He should be in academic prison for making the rest of them look worse.

I think there's merit in talking about pop culture consumable media as well as niche subculture media but Joe is so disconnected from other people that he is shitting into the pool of knowledge with his bullshit. Get out everyone, the pool's contaminated again, wait an hour while someone cleans it.

 

[A Sentient Cloud]

I do, everything I read from him is a crime of dumping word vomit on a page while huffing his own farts. He should be in academic prison for making the rest of them look worse.

I think there's merit in talking about pop culture consumable media as well as niche subculture media but Joe is so disconnected from other people that he is shitting into the pool of knowledge with his bullshit. Get out everyone, the pool's contaminated again, wait an hour while someone cleans it.

There are bad academics, just like there are bad lawyers and bad electricians and bad every other kind of profession. Like I said, bad academic analysis is still useful because the discursive nature of scholarship provides a framework for other, better scholars to respond to him and explain *why* he's wrong and full of shit. We learn from mistakes.

 

[AMHOLIO]

There are bad academics, just like there are bad lawyers and bad electricians and bad every other kind of profession. Like I said, bad academic analysis is still useful because the discursive nature of scholarship provides a framework for other, better scholars to respond to him and explain *why* he's wrong and full of shit. We learn from mistakes.

You're so right and I love this take, but I'm going to keep joking and exaggerating that Joe should be blocked from academia because it's funny.

He should also be dismissed from academia because he is a baggy walrus in human granny clothes.

 

[Larry David's Opera Cape]

From what I know of the gay men who are into "really disgusting gay subcultures", heterosexual looky-loo tourists are the LAST thing they want.

But we're not seriously going to posture like these freaks are some kind of "victims" here, are we?

"Oh woe, how horrible, our pure and lovely gay pig culture has been tainted by the presence of a degenerate HETERO POSER!"

Give me a break.

 

[Zemblan Physics]

But we're not seriously going to posture like these freaks are some kind of "victims" here, are we?

"Oh woe, how horrible, our pure and lovely gay pig culture has been tainted by the presence of a degenerate HETERO POSER!"

Give me a break.

I really don’t mind them as long as they don’t do it in the streets and don’t frighten the horses.

 

[Larry David's Opera Cape]

I really don’t mind them as long as they don’t do it in the streets and don’t frighten the horses.

They need fresh meat, so they groom.

Tolerate it at all, you end up with kids getting trooned out. People who do disgusting things should be regarded with disgust, discouraged, and suppresed.

 

[Treasure Champs]

@monstrous bubo There's the Humanities and then there's Grievance Studies. I have a lot of time for the former but very little for the latter. Humanities encompasses History, Archaeology, Geography, Languages, Religious Studies, all that sort of thing. Very few Archaeologists write about their penises like our friend Joe here, let alone describe them as shrivelled abortions or whatever offensive thing he said. Not a lot of Historians banging on about how much we learn from the gay culture of anal prolapses. Our academic lolcows are Rhys McKinnon (Philosophy, primarily 'me' studies), Joe (English, but primarily Literary Criticism aka theory bullshit + Me studies) and then that other guy who wanted to learn coding or whatever whose original discipline I have forgotten. Then Alex Caraballo who is in 'Cyber Law' but also mostly spouts on about how we should make favorable tranny law.

They are lolcows because they are troons, for the most part, and troons thrive only in the bullshitiest of bullshit disciplines, the ones where it is acceptable or even welcome to write about troons (everyone else, at least those whose job is to do something called 'critical thinking', has noticed that this ideology does not.... exactly.... add up, shall we say). These are also the hardest parts of academia to defend rationally, because it turns out that gay fisting or whatever really doesn't have much to teach us, either that is practical or that is widely applicable for the self-understanding of humanity.

tl:dr: don't blame academia for this shit, the troons in the sleeziest corners are just the rats in the subway of the humanities and their justifications for studying verbose wankery is nowhere near as convincing as the actual case for it.

 

[Trianon]

They say this. The same crowd asserts that homosexual behavior is normative and natural because animals engage in dominance humping and maybe in captivity do stress behaviors like getting confused and stealing a rock to nest on with another male. Natural! But then you say, if heterosexuality is not real, why does the same thing always predictably happen when you put a male and a female of the same species- cow, dog, cat, hamster, pigeon- in the same space? And they just flail their arms around and make disparaging noises like you're the retarded one.

The problem for Joe is that he has to convince his audience that, by heterosexuality, he doesn't mean heterosexuality; instead he means heterosexualishness, which is completely different and can be present even in non-heterosexual relationships. See "white" =/= "whiteness" and other nonsense that allows everyone who disagrees to be an oppressor benefiting from an undefinable power structure. It's not you, it's your heterosexualocity, which, when Joe uses it, means "embarrassing."

"Abolish the family" sounds a lot like prepping his little brood for his inevitable boredom. His flight won't be deadbeat abandonment, it will be principled abolition.

Followers of C Gill found Joe's position asinine *ahem*, perhaps because they did not know he counts on taxpayers' money for his misunderstanding of sit com episodes and therefore feels personally threatened by the Gillians' cost-cutting yen.

This gets me because of course Joe has no way to talk to those (me, for example, or my many admiring Farmers) who find it useless, stupid, and maybe also a bit gross. His argument is just "nuh-uh!" Which goes totally to @monstrous bubo's point that the academy can no longer justify itself because it has risen beyond the petty concerns of communicating ideas.

 

[AirdropShitposts]

Socialist Joe argues that no, the people should not have a say in the distribution of capital when it comes to his means of production.

Don't worry though, these resources are essential to the reproduction of the Vanguard which acts for the proletariat through the Party, so it's not a separate class.

 

[monstrous bubo]

It’s a cute little contest of wits between spouses, with each Lavery tweeting two tweets each with a jesting tone.

First, Joe makes a two-part funny starring Bobby Joe!



link | archive

Tard Baby counters with the observations of a quirky faux naïf on a roadtrip!



link | archive

So farmers, who won? And whatever would Tard Baby’s first word have been?

Spoiler

The winner was Lily of course. She kept her goddamn mouth shut.

 

[Potatis Salad]

New Substack from Mallory. (link | archive) It's a bunch of shit about her dogs. It's not bad, kinda funny if you're into dogs, but there was one factual tidbit that caught my eye. Mallory states that her dogs have spent their whole lives in NYC...

Then a series of rent increases brought our family out to a brief sojourn in Michigan, where we have a fenced backyard that has brought about an almost-total personality change in Bon-Bon over the course of a fortnight.

A...brief sojourn in Michigan? Is that what Rocco's two moms had to tell Joe to get him to come?

Look at those tard baby sneakers on our tard baby.

Joe and Mal's instincts for fashion are so uniformly terrible it's actually impressive.

 

[monstrous bubo]

Look at those tard baby sneakers on our tard baby.

I wouldn’t look twice if this were on the fundraising materials for a charity providing pet therapy to developmentally delayed adults