Fen at Cons = Pointless Yet Poignant Crises of Co-Eds

[juldea]

This is not my analogy, but I'm the one who's going to post it.

There's this song by Dar Williams called The Pointless, Yet Poignant, Crisis of a Co-ed. It tells a cute little story and is fun to listen to, but besides that, the story makes a point. I'll shove the lyrics at you, with important bits bolded.

I'm not a leader, i'm not a left-wing rhetoric mobilizing force of one,
But there was a time way back, many years ago in college, don't laugh,
But I thought I was a radical, I ran the hemp Liberation League with my boyfriend,
It was true love, with a common cause, and besides that, he was a Sagittarius.

We used to say that our love was like hemp rope, three times as strong as the rope that you buy domestically,
And we would bond in the face of oppression from big business and the deans,
But I knew there was a problem, every time the group would meet everyone would light up,
That made it difficult to discuss glaucoma and human rights, not to mention chemotherapy.

Well sometimes, life gives us lessons sent in ridiculous packaging,
And so I found him in the arms of a Student Against the Treacherous use of Fur,
And he gave no apology, he just turned to me, stoned out to the edge of oblivion,
He didn't pull up the sheets and I think he even smiled as he said to me,
"Well, I guess our dreams went up in smoke."
And I said, No, our dreams went up in dreams, you stupid pothead,
And another thing, what kind of a name is Students Against the Treacherous Use of Fur?
Fur is already dead, and besides, a name like that doesn't make a good acronym.

I am older now, I know the rise and gradual fall of a daily victory.
And I still write to my senators, saying they should legalize cannabis,
And I should know, cause I am a horticulturist, I have a husband and two children out in Lexington, Mass.
And my ex-boyfriend can't tell me I've sold out, because he's in a cult.
And he's not allowed to talk to me.

So yeah. Just like in the song, at cons we of the "higher minds" get together with the intent of changing the world, exchanging information, and generally being awesome... but instead we just get high, and by get high, I mean have lots of random kinky sex. At least from what I saw. The higher functions of the con were overshadowed by the meat-marketness of it all. I admit that I fall for this too; wishing I had flashier/sexier clothing, buying the relationship status button...

Perhaps this makes for a good forum topic?

Comments

[learnedax.livejournal.com]

Well, starting from the bottom, it is true that there's a lot of sex going on at cons (or Pennsic, or college, or anyplace with large groups of single people). If that was the predominant activity where you were, it certainly was in your sphere. I know you weren't looking, but the some members of the crowd you associate with frequently are. There are a lot of places where sex and flirting is the main entertainment, and lots of places where it never shows up. Neither is bad, but if you feel overwhelmed by the meat market atmosphere, there are other places you could check out.

Not all social interaction is part of a plan to change the world (and why should that by default be in a positive manner?). Sure, I talked shop with some new and interesting people at the con, but I also played some fun card games. I wasn't doing the latter because I was looking for some new angle of attack on the problems of the world, I was doing it because I felt like hanging out. There's no golden force for good inherent in Our Great Subculture, it's just a mass of humans, some more activist than others.

Yes, there is more weight given to knowledge by many of us. But that's intellectualism rather than intelligence, and while it is frequently a good thing, it doesn't mean we're "higher minds", which I've always seen used in relation to intelligence and vision. If you don't mean that by it, what exactly do you mean?

[juldea.livejournal.com]

If that was the predominant activity where you were, it certainly was in your sphere.

I disagree. There was a lot of filk happening at the Con too, and that's not my sphere either. I just don't find it as much as a waste of time and energy.

...I also played some fun card games. I wasn't doing the latter because I was looking for some new angle of attack on the problems of the world, I was doing it because I felt like hanging out.

No, but you didn't divest huge amounts of time, money, and energy doing it. And if you did, I'd berate you just as much.

<>Yes, there is more weight given to knowledge by many of us. But that's intellectualism rather than intelligence, and while it is frequently a good thing, it doesn't mean we're "higher minds", which I've always seen used in relation to intelligence and vision. If you don't mean that by it, what exactly do you mean?

It's called "being tongue-in-cheek." Note the quotation marks used in the original post.

[learnedax.livejournal.com]

If that was the predominant activity where you were, it certainly was in your sphere.

I disagree. There was a lot of filk happening at the Con too, and that's not my sphere either. I just don't find it as much as a waste of time and energy.

Well, aside from the question of why you're more anti-sex than anti-filk, since neither of them are Big Thought endeavors, I think you're still missing what I mean. Something being present in your sphere does NOT mean it's something you like to do, or seek out. It means it's something that you see because of where you are and who you're with. I didn't hear one bit of filk this year, and I have heard very little in previous years. So it's not some omnipresent force, just as sex is not.

Actually, I can't leave it entirely aside. Your vehemence (even if you backpedal saying it's tongue-in-cheek) against sex culture in specific is surprising, since you are normally pro-sex. Are you reacting to the attitude of polyamorists, specifically?

[juldea.livejournal.com]

I think that you're totally misinterpreting everything I'm saying if you come out of this thinking that I'm "anti-sex." I'm totally not. As you said... I'm pro-sex, qua sex. It is, yes, the attitude of many con-goers (I'm not going to say "of polyamorists," because then everyone will misinterpret that too and assume that I am lumping everyone together with no regard for intraculture differences or the fact that there's many flavors of polyamory) that bothers me.

In the terms of "how many con-goers view sex," filk is TOTALLY more of a big-thought activity than sex is. Filk involves, y'know, music and thought and writing, whereas hooking up at a con was, "Hey, you're cute." "You're cute too." "Let's fuck." "Okay."

I suppose I'm anti-random-meaningless-casual-sex.

Also, I did no backpedaling about tongue-in-cheek. The "higher minds" part was the only part I claim to be tongue-in-cheek, and I think that's rather obvious that I meant it that way in the first place.