Personal record

As a follow-up to yesterday’s piece, I am pleased to report that it generated a new one-day record for visits to this blog! My grateful thanks go in particular to the ever-charming denizens of the Egregious Chess Forum, without whose help this record could never have been achieved!

I never usually reply to termites, and did not plan to do so in this case, but several friends have pointed out one particular libel perpetrated by various of the forum morons, which perhaps does need answering. That is the charge that I have described the Gay Times (henceforth GT) as a “pornographic magazine”. In fact, that is not so. I did say in my piece below that CJ de Mooi plans to appear in a nude photoshoot in a pornographic magazine. And so he does, by his own admission, in what he refers to as “the Naked Charity issue” of the GT. I personally would regard a magazine, that is filled with pictures of naked men and women, as pornographic. Ergo, if an issue of a magazine appears, containing what I regard as pornographic content, then I will call that issue “a pornographic magazine”. That description sounds as though it applies to the “Naked Charity” issue of the GT.

However, anyone for whom English is their first language should be able to understand, that describing a particular issue of a magazine as pornographic, does not imply that one regards the generic publication itself as a porn magazine.  To take a purely hypothetical example, if the October issue of Chess comes out and is filled up with pictures of naked chessplayers – of whatever gender and/or sexual orientation, incidentally – then I would describe that issue as “a pornographic magazine”, but that does not mean that I regard Chess generally as a publication only fit for the newsagent’s top shelf. Likewise, if the next issue of Playboy magazine happens to contains a few articles on chessplayers, I would still not be tempted to reclassify Playboy generally as a chess magazine.

As I say, it really should not be necessary to point out such an obvious distinction, but even the most casual perusal of the Egregious Forum will suffice to show that normal standards of literacy or common sense are entirely absent from that hallowed, and very special piece of cyberspace.



%d bloggers like this: