A Brief History of Lies?

Saminashah

I dont understand. Why do I have to look elsewhere everywhere when I can hear it from horses mouth. You don`t buy milk from doodhwala when a cow is tied in your backyard.

So?......I am all ears.

Urstruly,

Here we`ve been talking about various intellectual figures and disease, and here you come with another well intentioned question!

How do we know? Why dont you some work on your own? Go to the library. READ A BOOK on these issues. I hear PSYCHOLOGY BOOKS might be able to give a NUMBER of ideas and theories that answer your question.

For God`s sake, take the bib off and feed yourself!

As a matter of fact it might be true because whiteman has turned it into a business opportunity. He has invented special parlours where you can slap on the bare bunns of a damsel scantly clad in leather stripes. My friend abdul who has been to such a place told me that they purr like kitten when spanked.

is it true that some women get sexual gratification from the beating they receive from their husbands?

Noor,

Thanks! Your input has been appreciated as well.

Sadna,

Liberal Arts fields such as Cultural Studies and Gender Studies do interrogate issues raised in this piece and interacts. Some fields find the deconstruction and analysis of ``low art`` more telling of a society`s mores, values and systems than any refined and theoretical novel with the best of intentions. I wouldnt classify this piece as ``low art``- (think of those American postcards from the fifties in which a voluptous beautiful woman is drawn underneath some lurid caption that hints of an underworld.) I would classify it as one writer musing on the imbalances that may be present between the genders in a phenomena that has traditionally been occupied by women.

The other interesting reminder in Liberal Arts is that there is no such thing as a singular narrative. The idea of a single narrative is the creation of the hard science field, and people seem to forget that such system theories are a construction of speculation as well.

The minds/travails of genius celebrities seem to be as fascinating to us as Tommy Lee and Pammy. Tell you the truth, I`d take Hawking`s current troubles anyday over those last two.
It would also be interesting to look at other geniuses who have suffered under considerable illness, John Nash, Oliver Sachs...both subjects of probing inquiries. Nash may have been bi sexual or gay according to the respected biography S. Nassar. (sp?)

Perhaps the science world needs to join the rest of us mortals?

Saminasha #62
Don`t those black woman victimiser narratives you cite convince you that it is best to stick to the story which fits one`s facts and avoid massaging the facts to fit one`s narrative?

I suspect Stephen Hawking IS like you and me and everyone including Farzana who dislike such idle speculations about their sex lives. Those and ``analysis`` of Paris Hilton type exhibitionism belong in the tabloids.

Perhaps such speculations as substitute for facts are also part of liberal arts academia. That I donot have to say about others` personal affairs what I would hate others saying about mine, is one of the perks of being a science wonk, I guess.

Stephen Hawking speculates only about the origins of the universe and apparently minds his own business otherwise(nor does he hang out in gogo bars like Richard Feynman did, with gusto). I think he deserves from the public a decent respect for his privacy.

It is good to see you around too.

sadna has touched upon the `jaR` of what i was mulling over when i first read this. . .this whole notion of speculation versus fact.

but i am still failing to see where if at all farzana has deemed anything that she has said to be a fact. opinions are opinions, not facts. i`d be more than happy to reread this article yet another time and find where she has. i also fail to see how this comes across as farzana`s `gospel truth`. it comes across to me as an opinion piece, which she is entitled to defend, as we feel we are entitled to destroy it. constructive criticism is always a good thing. always.

farzana has taken from reports and other sources to speculate on hawking`s life, to question something about it. it is uncomfortable, for me as well. but what i find equally uncomfortable is the vitriolic responses that have come from many. because these responses create nothing but defensiveness and moving further away from the issues.
i think samina and sadna`s dialogue is positive in the sense that it does continue discussion.

as someone who still struggles with her own physical disabilities, i can relate to the emotional cost, and the skewing of personalities, and yes we as disabled people are, i hate to use the same word papa unfailingly used with me `different`, hawking`s mind is much more brilliant than mine though, and those of `normal` people, and brilliant minds whether they be of a disabled person or not are not always geared towards . . . .what is the word. . .eesh, does it even matter if it doesn`t pertain to the issue?

anyways. . .i`ve lost an entire train track of thought here. . .so i`ll have to return when or if i can be more useful. . .

Sadna,

To your first comment, Black American women have been cast in a variety of roles; spectacle/sexual obsession as with the Venus Hottentot, nurturing Earth Mother/slave sexual property (has anyone ever wondered about Aunt Jemima lately), destroyer of the nuclear American family (Daniel Moynihan`s infamous paper on non traditional inner city woman headed households) Commie Revolutionary Bitch (Angela Davis/Assata Shakur, Lani Guenier), Ho Ready To Take Some Poor Guy To the CLeaners (Anita Hill, Robin Givens), Fraudulent Black Teenager Involved in Prosecution of Innocent White Cops (Tawana Brawley)...a whole national pathology has been projected on the descendants of Black American slavery....but not a peep from the desis about that...

Anyway,

One can hardly forbid people from speculating about the lives of extraordinary people...it is a human function unfortunately...from the village gossip to E...and I sympathise...I`m hella tired of reading/hearing about Paris Hilton, who seems to be a much more tragic case of handicappedness than anyone I`ve seen for years...and yet SHE`S allowed a kinky sex life!

And dont you think that Hawkings is like most of us? Just a slob like all of us, as Joan Osborne sings? A really really smart slob, but there you go. Isnt that one way of not discriminating against a man who has overcome societal discrimination?

Agree with you on the two timer. But then, thats men for you...

Glad to see you back on Chowk.

Saminasha #55
I doubt a black female would ever be cast as the victimiser in a victim narrative.
The answer to your question is 4 is

(e) I am offended by the speculation of Hawking`s particular case, because I feel
1. speculations about Hawking cannot be used as substitute for facts in a debate.
2. a disabled special case is an unfit subject to use for generalization about all men/women

Opinions are NOT facts, whether you are a science wonk or a liberal arts major or a woman or a victim.

If people refuse to accept your personal opinion/characterisations of Stephen Hawking as gospel truth, that doesnot automatically make them horrible evil people who persecute women and are in denial. Though they are mere men, in the absence of facts, they have the right to their own personal opinion about Stephen Hawkings just like Farzana.

Disabilities extract an emotional cost. Permanent disabilities can change/skew personalities out of shape. Stephen Hawking and his family have evidently been paying a huge emotional cost for his disabilities which came upon him in the prime of life when he already had a wife and two children.

IMO, most people understand that it is a miracle you can credit to him and his caregivers that he has been amazingly productive despite all this.

Expecting unimpeachable behaviour and picture perfect fortitude(which even perfectly normal people are incapable of), from either him or his caregivers on top of that, is expecting too much. And being bitchy about the absence of such picture-perfect fortitude from Hawking and his family is just too much.

Are the plain old self-absorbed self-pitying woman-persecuting ABLE-BODIED males all dead that a special case like Stephen Hawking should be used to generalize about all men?

If we want to beat up on someone how about beating up on that jerk Abimanyu, who has full possession of his bodily faculties and has been imposing his self-absorbed self-serving two-timing behaviour upon his wife, his girl friend and sundry other female relatives(and millions of viewers of the TV soap Astitva Ek Prem Kahani) while managing to feeling very sorry for himself all the while?

Mahesh,

Ironically your first paragraph includes the very cliches that have been used by abusers to justify their actions....and Hawkings doesnt need a robot as an excuse for his injuries; women have been using ``I fell.`` or ``I walked into the door`` for centuries.

No-one here is excusing or invalidating abuse. From what I understand, this piece is looking at the very complex and ambivalent manners in which people in relationships act. The assault on Stephen Hawking is a very serious matter, as assault on any human being is. I think this piece is looking at the psychological and social cultures that these two particular cases are playing out. If you look at any relationship of any degree of healthy or unhealthiness, there are various forms of interplay, whether they are implicit or explicit. My Sylvia Plath example was intentional- I know very little of Plath`s personal life. I do know her poetry however, some of which is astounding. There have been countless biographies and films speculating on her marriage to Ted Hughes, Ted Hughes` relationships with other women who have offed themselves, etc. Plath herself had considerable talent and a mental illness that eventually led to her self destruction.

Anne Sexton, another formidable and inimitable poet struggled with mental illness. There was a public stir (in the lit world anyway) when her daughter released private therapy sessions that Sexton had attended. I think that Sexton`s relationship with her children was affected by her illness....tell you the truth, I havent really looked too deeply into her personal life.

But scholars have looked and speculated into the motivations and desires of such women, as well as George Eliot, who married a man at least twenty years younger than her in her dotage etc. These inquiries imho, tend to demystify and make human the lives of these very bright people. This piece at least gives Hawkings a self that fleshed out and recognizable. A sight better than those battered women labels, dont you think?

PZ,

Have you read any Celan or Neruda yet?

Nooralain #54,

You don`t need to be Farzana`s secretary to figure out what her motives are.

We have seen this in all her previous articles. If this was the first article I was reading of hers, then yes, I maybe jumping the gun.

She has constantly penned articles that go against the majority viewpoint. Nothing wrong per se if she can actually use coherent arguments to make her point. Consider her evaluations of Jinnah and Nehru. Using the same arguments she comes to diametrically opposite conclusions. Jinnah is a secularist whereas Nehru is a communalist. She hasn`t responded to many of the posts on her previous thread, BTW.

Saminasha

You are a true philistine.

And curb your pedagogic instinct. When you try to patronise you make yourself look so stupid.

Samina #56,

Before we get into all that how do we know Stephen Hawking is abusing his wife? How do we know that Stephen Hawking is actually responsible for all gashes and cuts he has on his body? I am curious to know in what manner Hawking was ``partly`` responsible for the wounds on his body. Does he taunt his wife to the extent that she has no recourse but to physically abuse him? Or does he inflict the wounds on himself using some kind of a remote controlled robot?

Consider the roles reversed. Would Farzana be actually accusing the wife of playing the victim card because she is standing by her husband inspite of her showing up in the hospitals with gashes and cuts?

What I also find interesting is this contradictory defense of Hawking`s privacy and infirm condition.

Some questions:

1. Does being physically abused denote stigma?

2. Are some of us offended because the victim of abuse is an ``untypical`` receipient; i.e. in Sadna`s words, a ``white male``?

3. Is abuse of disabled folk statisically common? Does Hawking`s considerable intellectual abilities preclude his disabilities?

4. Are some of us offended by the speculation of Hawking`s particular case, because we feel:
a. an abused man deserves privacy
b. a disabled, abused man deserves privacy
c. a disabled, abused, intellectual celebrity deserves privacy
d. a disabled, abused intellectual celebrity could not possibly behave in manners that could be labelled as ``battered woman syndrome` or ``victim mentality`` or ``manipulative``?

PZ,

Awwww....so its okay to hang Miss Sylvia`s wash up on the clothesline, but one must NEVER dare to look askance at whatshisname? Glad to see youre actually reading poetry lately...

Irfan Sahib,

ONE psych class does not a foundation make...it makes about one footpath if you are lucky...and please inform us of the role that creativity has taken in the lives of Mr. Einstein, Mr. Edison, etc...science wonks who tread a different and less rigidly defined road?

Farzana,

This did NOT come off as a diatribe against men....but it seems once the collective shoe is on the other foot, they say the shoemaker is a man hater!

So very interesting...