Wednesday,
May 9th, 2001
Brandy Alexandre Talks About Dr John Gray On Bob Berkowitz
BrandyAlx1: I can see that Farrell doesn't know what meter is when
he declares that his is in it and mine is not.
Luzdedos1: lol, how was the berkowitz show?
BrandyAlx1: Great. Gave me the whole hour
BrandyAlx1: Hit everything ranging from how Dr. John Gray doesn't know
his stuff to how I'm orange now trying a self-tanning lotion. :)
BrandyAlx1: I mention your site twice, I think. That'll be $20... each.
Luzdedos1: where is Dr John Gray wrong?
BrandyAlx1: About telling a boyfriend I was in porn
Luzdedos1: What did Dr Gray say about that?
BrandyAlx1: Dr. Gray said I never should tell. But me and Bob strongly
disagree. The truth always comes out
Luzdedos1: when did you talk with Dr Gray?
BrandyAlx1: I sent a letter to his column. He rewrote it (changing the
tone the context) and answered it in his column in the LA Times January
17, 1999.
BrandyAlx1: He used the banner for that day "It's OK if Ex-Porn Star
Keeps Quiet About Her Past"
BrandyAlx1: Just got an email "Heard your interview on E-Yada and really
enjoyed it. You really bring good insight into the porn business."
BrandyAlx1: I'd advertise things like that more in advance, but there's
too many immature people who would try to ruin it for everyone involved
due to their petty disagreements.
Luzdedos1: thanks, fascinating, i guess i largely agree wtih dr gray
BrandyAlx1: Really? Largely? In what small ways would you disagree?
Luzdedos1: Ok, i totally agree with him, i'd wait a long time to share
the info
BrandyAlx1: According to my survey, though, the consensus seemed to
be you should tell after a few dates. When you know each other and will
likely continue dating
BrandyAlx1: I think if you wait too much longer, or don't do it at all,
they will feel terribly deceived. In my example, suppose someone I'm
seeing has a friend who recognizes me and feel "obligated?" In my survey,
the guys said they would probably tell. BrandyAlx1: http://kamikaze.org/survey.html
BrandyAlx1: It's sort of like when you were out with someone and they
recognized you. Yeah, most people would be more discreet, but you know
as well as I do that when it comes to porn, the blood ain't always in
the brain. ;) "Yo dude! You're Luke F-rd! Did you get to do a lot of
those porn girls?"
BrandyAlx1: (Had to do the surfer thing because you're in Santa Monica.)
BrandyAlx1: I printed out my book in book form--double-sided, headered,
numbered--on 8.5 x 11 paper, 12 pt. Times type. Came to 242 pages and
there's still two or so chapters to do. Pretty substantial manuscript
for something never likely to be published.
BrandyAlx1: It looked really good though. :) Sent it to a friend for
a critique.
BrandyAlx1: I bought 500 shares of a stock back in the mid-80s from
a company that went out of business. Their main intended product didn't
fly. I just got a letter announcing the acquisition of an international
construction firm and apparently the stock has been trading again over
the last 6 months. It was up around $7 a week ago. Kewl. :) BrandyAlx1:
Oh, another thing I did was dis AVN on Berkowitz. Someone wrote in and
asked how much value awards had to the recipients. You can imagine my
reply. ;)
Dear John: I am a former porn star, which brings me to my question: When does one tell a possible mate about his/her past, if at all?
I've been out of the industry since 1992. I'm older now, so it's unlikely I would be recognized, but fans can always surprise you. During that time, I've worked for the same company as an executive secretary. When people change jobs, it's usually not a big deal for them to discuss what they used to do. That's a luxury not reserved for porn stars.
One friend, a male, says I should never tell -- not even if I was to get married. Then again, this so-called "friend" fixed me up twice, and both times told my dates my secret. He felt he had a duty to let them know!
In the past, my honesty has turned a nice dinner date into a "Let's skip dinner and get down to business" offer. Others beg off when they find out.
My past is not something I really want to hide; I still want to be true to myself, as I feel we are all the sum of our life experiences. Still, if the person is completely opposed to the idea for one reason or another, I don't want to waste his or my time. Should I 'fess up? And if so, at what point in the relationship? -- Haunted By My Past in Palm Beach
Dr John Gray replies: Dear Haunted: The doorway to intimacy is opened by sharing the complete truth. Having said that, let me add that there is always a time and a place when sharing the truth is difficult, if not impossible. Perhaps, in a perfect world, we could share every past detail with our soul mate.
Everyone has things about their past that they are not proud of. We are all human, and we all make mistakes. If talking about your past brings up the fear that you will be judged or criticized, it is best that you not bring it up.
There are many happily married couples who have not shared everything about their pasts. As a general rule, I don't recommend that people in their 30s and beyond give explicit details of their past sexual experiences to their partners. While some people have no problems with their soul mate's past, many find this subject disconcerting.
It may even be that you feel you've found the person you want to share your life with, but you feel this particular truth would be too hard for him to understand at this time. Years down the road, as intimacy and trust grows, you might be able to share this information and feel completely loved and supported.
When someone recognizes you and wants you to confirm that you are who they think you are, simply answer, "You must be mistaken. I'm not the person you think I am." In a way, you are telling the truth because you have changed. Besides, our personal past is no one's business but our own. I'm certain some very famous people would agree with me about that.
Does Vivid Have All The Money?
MarMac writes on RAME: It seems that everytime there is a hot, new girl that comes to porn, Vivid comes along and signs her up and ruins her. Mirage/Brianna Banks is the latest "victim". Others are Sky (who I envisioned as the nastiest girl to come along since Alisha Klass), Cheyanne Silver and Dayton Raines. Do they always win in a bidding war against the others?
It would seem that Evil Angel, Elegant Angel and Anabolic would stand just as good a chance as Vivid at getting some of these hot girls. Yet it seems that old Steve manages to get some of the hottest to do his lame ass porn. What gives? Does Stagliano, Collins and the others try to keep some of these girls with them or do they just give up on them and let them go to Vivid?
Frank Simns writes on RAME: Vivid pays well, publicizes the hell out of their girls, doesn't insist upon overworking them, treats the women like they are goddesses, for the most part doesn't insist on making them do anything they don't want to, and can point to the success of prior Vivid girls. Why the hell would any porn chic *not* want to work for Vivid? Whether we fans like it or not, it's probably the apex of the career from the star's point of view.
Who Is Kaos Management?
AlienX@SinCityFilms.com writes: "I have put up my arms as it certainly looks like Sin City will not advertise within sex.com, we appearently are not welcome after weeks of emailing and excuses from there party. It is appearent to me that they are not interested having the worlds possibly 4th largest adult video production company within there pages, when they got America's greatest #1 adult video company everybody loves already inside, which seems to be okay with everyone.
"Big time rumors are that many many adult webmasters have no faith in sex.com decision's and structure. Actually it is quite a laughing stock to many. Some have gone so far as to say that sex.com was in better hands with Cohen at this point."
Luke Gets Mail
Don writes: I just saw your Keri interview, good job. I saw a movie of her and Sean Michaels yesterday and it was awesome, wanted to relay message to you on the movie. It was Sean's line, naughty wives club 4
Rug_burnz writes: well the repercussions of you running the toupee gif have surfaced. can you believe how freaking antisemitic these pricks are?
MHJ writes: If you haven't seen it (and I presume you haven't since it's not mentioned on your site today), see page A-27 of the Wall Street Journal for Wednesday, May 9, 2001. There's a story there about the latest in the Kathryn Gannon (a.k.a. Marilyn Star) SEC scandal. You may find it interesting. Cute engraving of Marilyn, too, by the way.
Farrell Timlake vs Brandy Alexandre
BrandyAlx1: The was an older porner named Timlake
Whose interests were only for him sake
He tried to arouse
With arrogant prose
But just served to expose as a dim fake
Farrell Timlake from Homegrown Video writes:
I knew a girl named brandy
with hair that was kind of sandy
she would curl your toes
with the tip of her nose
while she sucked your dick like candy
At the very least, Brandy, poor Brandy, mine actually rhymes, stays in meter, and pays homage to your proboscis, which by the way sticks much more prominently up in the hot air of arrogance than mine is capable of doing. Now try this on for size.
There once was a porn star you will barely remember
I believe her name was brandy, brandy alexander
Yes now I recall I did a scene with her but we did not ball
she sucked my cock, f---, I was hard as a rock
when I plastered her face with a semen baste
She did not complain though she must have felt pain
I'm sure you can guess why
Right?
It went in her eye
Then that must be it why she gives me such s--- and never lets bygones
go bye
Brandy, next time do something more meaningful to the community like debate HIV with me. Writing bad poetry to try and belittle me is proof enough not only of your lack of tact, but also points positively to your own arrogance. So I will finish like this:
You think you are a poet
and already know it
but I know you are not
because you are dumber than snot
as your frequent rants expose you
and your bitching does too
suck some more cock
because that I can't knock
like your HIV views
Evil Angelic blues
your hirings and firings
and all the crap you call news
At www.homegrownvideo.com, we are committed to providing the best possible authentic amateur entertainment you can imagine and defending ourselves against the onslaught of marauding ex-porn stars trying to pick a fight.
BrandyAlx1: I can see that Farrell doesn't know what meter is when he declares that his is in it and mine is not.
Brandy Alexandre (who appeared on the Bob Berkowtiz show on Eyada.com Wednesday morning) writes:
Luke F-rd was a pestering groupie
Whose writing compared well to poopie
A book about porn
Was met with such scorn
That he cried till his matzo was soupie.
Gregory Bowman writes:
When stranded alone with Farrell and Brandy.
One morning I felt kinda peckish and randy,
I stood there erect with my cock in my handy,
But Ferrell approached with a grin and a yearn,
I said to him loudly with no uncertain terms
Sorry you FRUITCAKE this rod is only girl candy.
BrandyAlx1: I just got an email asking just where Farrell got his degree and suggesting Chuck E. Cheese. I replied, "His vainglorious word choice, trying to sound perspicacious in his obtrectation of his chosen nemesis, exposed him as nothing more than a sententious blatherskite and made his claim to a degree in literature (obviously confused with literacy) seem mere fanfaronade.
Free Speech Coalition Does Sacramento
The Los Angeles Times reports today on the Free Speech Coalition trip this week to Sacramento.
MikeSouth.com writes: I am gonna forego my preamble and just jump straight to the truth. The following quotes ran in The L.A. Times My questions are below each one.
"At each stop Tuesday, the porn lobbyists distributed a white paper portraying the industry as an economic force: more than 20,000 Californians, including 12,500 dancers, employed by 175 exotic clubs in the state; an estimated $31 million in state sales tax from the rentals of 130 million adult videos, and nearly $1.8 billion in Internet sales and traffic nationwide. In all, the trade group visited the offices of more than 70 lawmakers--more than half of the 120-member Legislature."
Since when does the Free Speech Coalition represent dancers and exotic clubs? I thought this was an alliance initially pushed by Mike Ross and the Free Speech Coalition wanted nothing to do with the strip clubs. Why is it now you claim to represent them? In the whole L.A. Times article I read NOTHING about exactly what it is you are proposing to "half the members of the legislature" Nothing about any bills you authored for support, nothing. It reads as though you went in and said hey we are all nice people so you shouldn't be mean to us.
"Nursing that evolution is the foundation, which Executive Director Bill Lyon said has a $600,000 budget, much of which is funded by large video production houses in the Valley. Part of the money is spent on legal defense in obscenity and free-speech cases and to pay $10,000 rewards for information leading to the arrest and conviction of child pornographers."
OK here is the big one. 600,000 dollars people, and in spite of my goading and probing they have never named one single pornographer or one single store owner that they helped defend him/herself. in Two years I have asked repeatedly...not ONE!
Now Lets broaden this; I challenge them to name one instance of a person who has received that 10,000 dollar reward. truth is people, they have not spent that money on anything except over inflated salaries for FSC officials, Bill Lyon, Kat Sunlove and an annual trip to Sacramento to fumble around and play to the masturbatory fantasies of the democrats in the California Legislature. Until they become financially accountable, and actually start doing something that this industry can be proud to be a part of I urge everyone who is providing this 600,000 dollars to simply withhold it and put it into a defense fund that you administer at your will, or donate it to the Libertarians. Or hell buy something with it...anything at least that way the local economy benefits from it.
The Free Speech Cabal should be a strong force in this industry, they should be the first on the scene in Free Speech and Obscenity prosecutions all over this country and the name alone should strike fear in the hearts of prosecutors. As it is it is just The Free Speech Cabal, a den of inept, industry fattened hyenas cowering from anything resembling a fight.
Fred writes: I'll start out by saying that I know nothing about lobbying. Zippo. Nada.
But I wager that if I had a $600K budget for lobbying on a cause, I would take at least 1/3 (or maybe 2/3) and quietly make donations to the election campaigns of friendly legislators. My normal inclination would be to take the rest and try to convince the legislators that there were lots of voters in my camp.
Regarding the suggestion that the $600K should be directed toward criminal defense, I work primarily in corporate civil litigation. It's inconceivable that someone could try a case in my field for that small an amount of money. But I must admit, I don't really have a good handle on the economics of criminal defense. If Joe Average Videostoreowner is indicted on obscenity in Mississippi, Oklahoma or Ohio, how much would it cost for such a defense? If it's $50K, the Free Speech Coalition is not going to strike terror into the heart of prosecutors by defending a dozen people per year.
Luke says: There is no way that the Free Speech Coalition has a $600,000 budget. It isn't half that. They'd be thrilled to bring $200,000 a year.
Linda Lovelace Special On Luke F-rd Live
I interviewed porn journalist Eric Danville on today's show (from 4-6PM PST) on Webmasterlive.com. He recently wrote "The Complete Linda Lovelace: A Deeper-Than-Deep Look at America's First Porn Queen." (See www.completelindalovelace.com)
Listen here. Read the chat here.
James DiGiorgio writes Luke: whadya mean YOU interviewed Eric Danville??? I did a helluva lot more interviewing than you did! It don't even look like i was there!!
Jason writes: Luke, Great show tonight. Jimmy the Retard was no retard! He asked some good questions and behaved himself just as you asked. Ferrell was ok last week but JimmyD - he da man!
Your interview (or, er, should I say Jimmy's interview), with Eric Danville was way better than Bob Berkowitz's on eYada.com. You had more questions for Jay it seemed to me but that figures cause he's an intellectual and that's more your thing. As I've said before Jay's book is very interesting. I've got to track down Joe Slade's book now. Has Prof. Slade been on the show? He'd be good.
And I don't think you need to worry about JimmyD as long as you've got a quality guest on. Jimmy's a smart cookie. You and he are the Woodward and Bernstein of the porno journo world......you being Bernstein of course..... Keep up the good work, you've got lots of readers and listeners.
I know this career of yours tears you apart but now more than ever the porno industry needs good coverage. Why? Because it's obvious that things porno are going mainstream more and more. The cross-overs are happening and we need to know the who, what, when, where and why of it all. Porno chic has had a big influence on pop culture. The TNN cable network has been re-running old Miami Vice episodes. That series was one of the first to pick up a lot of the porno style. I wonder if Prof. Slade has written about the porno influences on Miami Vice? Who's on the Luke and Jimmy Show next week?
Dr Jay Gertzman writes: I wanted to make myself clear about vice areas like Times Square used to be. Times Square throughout the period was more than a place to go to read/see "dirty" books and movies. It was a low-cost entertainment area for people in general: a rival of Coney Island type entertainment. It included restaurants, haberdasheries, electronics stores, hotels, delis, pinball arcades, and, until the sixties, open-air auctions, shooting galleries and flea museums. The bookstores and movie theatres got more exclusively erotic, bought more leases, got more explicit, through the cleverness and business greed (if you will) of the porn entrepreneurs. But that also means: through the same motives in the police, politicians, and real estate concerns. The street got more sleazy and dangerous in the 70s and 80s, and the support services for maintaining a kind of low-rent amusement area went away, leaving a lot of petty criminals, sick street people, alcoholics, desperate hookers, violent pimps and hard core sex emporia. All the while, the people who owned the real estate were content to collect high rents from the merchants, who were, increasingly, mafia bosses.
Every year there were campaigns to clean up the place, and they were all charades. It wasn't b/c of the "cancer on society" that the crime bosses and pornographers represented; it was because of the economics of the situation, for everyone in all sorts of power positions. The Times Square "clean up" happened because technology had made it possible not to have to patronize a vice area to get porn--the industry you cover now had gotten the upper hand. In addition, federal officials were able to use investigative tactics of dubious constitutionality to built cases against now-vulnerable mafia bosses, and large corporations needed more and more office space and visibility in the public eye--it is now life blood to these goliaths. Joe Slade covers all of this is his terrific books. Who is the underworld and who is the public benefactor who has the people's best interest in mind? On what moral scale can we measure the "respectable" businessmen and public officials against the entrepreneurs of sex who, the pompous said, made Times Square a lawless jungle (which it wasn't until upperworld and underworld cooperated)?
Luke Pays For Your Sins
Lynne writes: Lynne writes: I can't win. I get upset with Luke because he allows his friends to abuse me, thus abusing me himself because he condones their bad behavior. So I vow to be good to myself and not go where I'm obviously not wanted. I spend hours on a Sunday morning drafting a tirade against Luke, which I send to Quasarman. Lo and behold, the Q-man chooses to be abusive as well.
"Quasarman writes: Due to the overwhelming production schedule that I am presently faced with I will be unable to update for most of this week. Next week however I will delivering incisive reports from 2 different movie sets complete with pictures as well as embarassing recollections of male performers and their inability to maintain erections. Until then I leave you with the drunken ramblings of our favorite bi-polar Luke F-rd fan Lynne L-patin."
We're making a couple of really mean accusations here about me, in the context of joking, but neither of them are true, and neither show me any respect. When Michael Raven writes in, do we accuse him of being a "broken down, pussy-whipped hack" before we discuss his videos? When we post the musings of Jimmy DiGiorgio, do we note that he's an "obese, ugly old fart" before mentioning he's casting "Sopornos 3?" If Asia should update Luke on her dance schedule, why don't we preface it with..."That painted whore, Asia Carrera, writes..." Or when Jenna Jameson fills us in on her latest doings, why don't we remind the readership first that "Jenna J, the over-the-hill bag with the plastic tits...?"
We don't do this because it's wrong...because it's offensive, and because the people in question might a) sue or b) cease their correspondence. It's wrong to do it to me, too. There's nothing funny about gratuitous insults. Luke set the precedent when he allowed his buddies to use his site to humiliate me just because I couldn't defend myself against anonymous, hurtful lies, false accusations of criminal behavior, and completely unnecessary, hurtful garbage. Luke and I have discussed this in private, and I'm hoping the light has gone on in that devious little yarmulke-covered mind of his...friends don't allow other friends to humiliate friends....
Quasarman couldn't resist a cheap shot at me...Quasarman will never have to worry about getting an e-mail from me again. For the record, and for the last time, because other people manage to participate on l-keford.com without career-damaging slurs: I am not an alcoholic. I certainly don't need to be intoxicated to hurl venom at Luke F-rd. I have never stalked ANYONE To joke about that trivializes some really serious criminal behavior. I began taking anti-depressants when my husband was diagnosed with terminal cancer, which is damn depressing, and not a sign of "mental illness." I produced five really high quality porn videos, for which I should be remembered, not to mention a professional career in adult entertainment as a writer, editor and executive which began in 1975. Let's start using the truth when we refer to me, please, as we try to do with every other participant on l-keford.com. Slurs and deliberate lies don't belong on this site. Mistakes, of course, are legion...
I approached Q with an offer he trivialized and posted in the ultimate lazy cut-and-paste style -- made a perfectly funny rant unreadable by screwing up the line length. Let's try again:
"Quasarman, it looks like you're in luck. You need copy? I have copy. You made your own jokes about Lynne stalking Luke, and Luke refuted them, but now his loser buddies have decided to perpetuate the same rumors about me over on l-keford.com. I don't dare risk federal cyberspace felony stalking charges by e-mailing Luke to complain, or to respond to postings on his site until he apologizes. You may remember that Luke himself was accused of stalking his Jewish pseudo-daddy Dennis Prager back in 1998. At the time he found it "hurtful" and "disgusting" that anyone would think he would do such a thing, but Luke Guystalker and His Three Stooges, Spurious, Dumbdar and Chaim Amelonhead have bonded over insulting me by slapping the same label on me. I'm sorry to have to give Luke a taste of his own homeopathetic medicine, but the boy's disturbed, seriously disturbed. Elevating his personal wanking circle of civilians over a veteran porner like myself is typical of his inner, anti-porn conflict. Luke wouldn't know he was shooting blanks if he shot himself in the foot, which he finally did last week. Someone, take the gun away from the boy before he hurts himself! (No, on second thought…give it back, and make sure it's loaded with real bullets this time…)
Of course, Quaze, you aren't all there yourself. You make smut, not art, and please don't forget it. You state: "I have nothing personally against the heavy members of our society just as I have nothing against homosexuals or the transgendered but I'd prefer not to see any of them have sex." You are indeed representative of the New Wave of pornographers, following in the footsteps of the Buttman, making what YOU wanna see rather than what the market wants to buy. Nobody cares about the consumer any more…in the Good Old Days, we used to shoot whatever we could sell: plumpers, trannies, Siamese twins. We didn't have to like it; we just had to sell it. But now, post-Ed Powers and John Stagliano, you guys have all turned artiste. And you guys all wanna see the same thing…skinny, bored young blondes with fake tits taking it up the ass…
Speaking of fake tits and losers, over on l-keford.com, LT writes: Luke, I've got to admit I'm a bit disappointed in NJG and Lynne's lumping every male LF contributor in together. I don't belong in that, and it's wrong to "lump". I've never made any remarks one way or the other to NJG and the only comments I made to Lynne were expressing my extreme disappointment in her attitude toward breast implants. I was not harsh toward Lynne, I just suggested she go back and do some soul searching and reflection in this area since she is obviously a deep thinker. Mainly, I wanted to point out that her perception of that area perhaps was clouded by her involvement and I happen to know the opposite of her then stated beliefs were true. I've noticed a perceptable change, so perhaps she has examined the breast implant boom in life in general, but particularly in porn, more thoroughly...like I know she is capable of. So you can see why I am disappointed to be lumped in with the mean spirited and the misogynists. I never made any comments about Andrea Thompson or "a woman's place"...Luke, you can vouch for me.
Lynne replies to LT: Being that Lukey McFordlame and Our Gang, Buckdar, Insecurious and Chaim Alfalfalek are all founding members of the He-Man Woman Haters Club, I don't think they could honestly vouch for you, LT. But no, NJG and I don't lump you in with them. We're like the Marines -- we still believe there's a few good men out there somewhere. But any friend of Luke's is no friend of Woman.
As to breast implants, my attitude will never change. I think implants are unnatural. They make me queasy. I fell in love with big breasts in 1970, looking at my dad's Playboy magazines. I hit the jackpot a few years later when I started working in porn myself, in the days when huge breasts were natural and women were built like women, not prepubescent girls. I like the feel of real breasts, the heft of real breasts, the way real breasts jiggle and shake when a woman's body is pounded during intercourse. Yes, real breasts are asymmetrical, real breasts soften and hang with age, but why settle for artificial when one can have the real thing? Like Coke, it's the real thing that does it for me. Everything else is just imitation.
And while I'm cutting and pasting, also on l-keford.com, Jimmy DiGiorgio says: I'm thinking of taking an ad in Dramalogue or the Hollywood Reporter and saying that I am a bored pornographer and I am looking for some wildly energetic enthusiastic filmmakers. You provide the enthusiasm, I will provide the technical skill and equipment to make their dreams a reality. Why do I hoist a very expensive camera on my shoulder to record a penis going in a vagina? I could be doing news, documentaries..."
Hey, Jimmy, that's what you get for hanging out with a very small group of guys, who pat each other on the back for being homogenous. I've got a drawer full of low-budget, Sundance-style movie treatments. I made some good porno movies that no one will watch, that I intended to use as a springboard to go on to mainstream. But being that I have no fundamental worth as a person, who will ever know? You want enthusiasm? That I got. You want energy? That I got. You want creativity? That I got in bushels. You want funding? That I ain't got. That was my late husband's job, wearing the suit, looking like a guy who knew what to do with money. I just do all the work. When you're ready to make the next "Blair Witch Project" or "Reservoir Dogs" just take your face out from between Luke's butt cheeks and speak to me."
Now, let's assume that someone is insulted by the above. How should they respond? First, they gotta be funny. "Lynne is a stupid ugly hag" is not funny, just rude. But if Jimmy DiGiorgio were to write..."Lynne, how can you accuse me of having my face between Luke's butt cheeks when you never take yours out?"....that would be funny. It refers to what I've written about him, and comments upon imaginary behavior similar to that of which I accuse Jim. If Chaim Amalek refers to me as Lynne Lo-pattycake it would be an appropriate response to me calling him Chaim Alfalfalek, whereas calling me "a stupid ugly hag" is inappropriate and rude. I have made a silly reference to Chaim's name, not called him "the most obese moronic slob in Gotham." It's more work to be funny, but oh, so much more rewarding!
If one cannot defend one's behavior, insulting me for criticizing it doesn't validate it, but it does make me really upset and angry, and if I were the unbalanced person everyone is so fond of pretending I am, wouldn't I react in a dangerous fashion? Wouldn't the insults and humiliation push me over "the edge." If you smack a dog often enough with a stick, and it finally loses control and bites you, whose fault is it? Not the dog's!
And if you don't have something funny to say, don't say it. Don't pressure Luke into posting something just to be hurtful to me. Luke is so very weak, and so very vulnerable, and it would be so sad if I were driven temporarily insane, and could not help but assault his tender hindmost parts with my fist...