My girlfriend tells me that my writing provides a misleading picture of me and that is probably true. While I strive for honesty, given that in my view such a thing is rare in the rhetorical offerings available, I am neither so foolish or vain to attempt to project such forthcoming bluntness in person. In other words, I believe that circumspection is a more prudent course than live verbal diarrhea, in most cases. Circumspection in general reflects a sense of consideration for the feelings of others.
I do not generally share with acquaintances that this blog exists. After all, I write under a pseudonym. Caprizchka is neither my given nor legal name and does not represent any known national, geographic, or cultural heritage to which I can lay any legitimate claim. Rather, I have culturally-appropriated a vaguely Russian or Eastern European name of my own invention. If I am a blonde, vaguely Germanic person, I thought it would be a reasonable costume that doesn’t appear to be entirely unreasonable. Am I wrong?
Since I am not making any money off of this blog, I have no incentive to be anything other than honest. In effect, this blog is an experiment to see if my honest views have any sort of traction with a regular audience. Since the reader can participate entirely anonymously, there is no need to be concerned that my feelings matter. I have no way of knowing whether a reader actually reads an entire blog piece or clicks away in disgust or boredom. There is no reason for me to censure my thoughts whatsoever on that front. If I censure myself it is generally to protect someone, to include myself, should I determine that complete honesty might be dangerous.
This blog therefore does not aim to ingratiate or placate my readership, who, for all I know, may be comprised of a majority of persons hostile to my views.
Therefore, it would be entirely subjective of any party to determine whether this blog is in the public interest or whether it is kind of me to devote energy toward it. Furthermore, the reader only has my say so that it is honest. Albeit I would hope that my record of consistency buttresses my claim of its honesty, if I have been forced to fudge a little there as well over time.
For example, whereas I repeatedly refer to my “ex-husband” in earlier entries of this blog, the man is in fact my current and missing husband. However, prior to Axel’s death, I didn’t find it to be useful to emphasize the fact that he was cuckolding a missing man. It did not seem useful to me to show Axel in such a negative light according to conventional morality, particularly when I worshiped the ground that Axel walked on.
Moreover, it is likely albeit uncertain that my missing husband is dead, in which case, that would effectively supply the “ex” of “ex-husband”. It was a concerted choice to make that slight distortion in my earlier pieces.
Axel, on the other hand, left such things entirely up to my own discretion in that he was about the most indifferent to the opinions of strangers as a human being can be.
I suspect that a lot of his attitude in that respect has rubbed off on me. It was somewhat preexisting but perhaps needed an environment where social indifference was paradoxically nourished. This indifference is why my girlfriend is concerned that this blog is misleading and therefore alienating of social prospects. What sort of a woman doesn’t care what strangers think of her? A woman like me. That’s who. After what I have experienced in this life, the fear of being socially shunned is way down on the scale. Walking away alive after being confronted with some of my dangerous life experiences overshadows vague approval symbols from strangers.
However, since I like her, treat her with respect and affection, and cater to her interests, I am obviously not completely immune to her approval. The fact is, when it comes to people who I care for, I relish the opportunity to cater to their passions. I am in fact overcome with the capacity to cater to the passions of others. I enjoy it and live for it. I love to serve. However, indifference to my service doesn’t hurt my feelings. In my view, service that is not given freely or is loaded with expectations such that it requires quid pro quo is not service at all.
♣ ♣ ♣
Why are so few women publicly critical of feminism? Because to most women, the opinion of the public matters and we’ve been told that sympathy toward feminism is the majority public opinion (or the socially sanctified one) even if that isn’t true. Therefore, to be a female anti-feminist is a paradox in that even one’s own femininity is questioned. The paradox continues in that, in my view, feminism redefines femininity as well as masculinity.
The paradox continues when a man who is himself anti-feminist proceeds to overtly or subconsciously question my own femininity because I am being honest and otherwise not considerate toward what is supposedly majority public opinion.
It might therefore come as a surprise to some element of my readership that I am capable of kindness. It would probably come as less of a surprise that I don’t generally put a high value on kindness myself whether to give or receive it. I tend to put a higher value on honesty. If a person shows pleasure in my company or appreciation thereof, I would hope that such manifestations are honest rather than kind.
Similarly, if I show such manifestations of pleasure or appreciation to another, why is it that so frequently the object of my attentions calls those manifestations, “kind”?
Is this some sort of modern cultural or rhetorical tic?
Am I cruel to deny that “kindness” is my motivation?
Isn’t honesty a greater reflection of admiration and esteem than kindness?