[thewall91]

Originally Posted by Magic Wheel Memory

And what about his band mates and their children? Do they not matter? Do you just yank the plug on their livelihood because of sexual problems having nothing to do with them?

apparently they didn't. apparently all that mattered was thurston's need for a little side nookie. these should have been considerations of his. kim stuck it out for a while, they tried therapy, they tried other things. in the end, thurston's needs overwrote kim's and his daughter's and the band's. there's no way he couldn't have assumed his actions would hurt other people. it just didn't matter as much to him. that's the simplest way to put it. but hey, if he's happy and satisfied now, and if Ms. Prinz's sexual practices don't change at all with age, it should all be worth it to him, right?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by thewall91

apparently they didn't. apparently all that mattered was thurston's need for a little side nookie. these should have been considerations of his. kim stuck it out for a while, they tried therapy, they tried other things. in the end, thurston's needs overwrote kim's and his daughter's and the band's. there's no way he couldn't have assumed his actions would hurt other people. it just didn't matter as much to him. that's the simplest way to put it. but hey, if he's happy and satisfied now, and if Ms. Prinz's sexual practices don't change at all with age, it should all be worth it to him, right?

again with the stupid assumptions and speculations.

"side nookie"? how the fuck do you know what that affair was about? could have been about anything. they have to go to therapy to figure it out, but you already know from a distance?

 

maybe you should open up an office where you do telepathic consultations.

the fact is-- we don't know why the affair happened, or why it continued/continues.

and we're not being told why, and we should be fine with that, instead of trying to peer like creepos into someone's psyche and projecting our own limitations onto their lives.

for fucks sakes.

(@ magic wheel-- see, this is why your "example" was so unfortunate-- it's now being discussed as fact, rather than any X factor. people are not logical like that-- they get sidetracked in silly narratives and salacious images.)

anyway, we've become the youtube comments now. the simples that got suckered in, as jennthebenn said. time to go kill myself.

 

[whorefrost]

Kim on bbc4 woman's hour hehe

[Rob Instigator]

she had a baby with Thurston. that is much more than just an affair....

[whorefrost]

Btw fucked up symbol is one of the most intelligent guys on here! The example Magic came up with was definitely unfortunate to say the least. Especially in a place as unused to nuanced discussion as SYG! And when people first started saying team Kim or team Thurston I assumed it was a joke, should've known better of course..

[Rob Instigator]

I was joking with the "Team Kim" but it's cuz I love her all the time

[thewall91]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

"side nookie"? how the fuck do you know what that affair was about? could have been about anything. they have to go to therapy to figure it out, but you already know from a distance?

I don't know what the affair was about. I do know what it wasn't about - respect for marital vows, or bandmates, considering the marital relationship was a part of the business relationship.

"side nookie" is just a term. not quite sure how intentions are worked into that term. I probably could have just as easily have said "it was all about thurston's needs" and ended the sentence there. would that make you happier with my wording? i think either are accurate statements, but I will modify it for the sake of your argument.

[stu666]

Kim Gordon speaks to Lauren Laverne

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b055pvxg

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by thewall91

I don't know what the affair was about. I do know what it wasn't about - respect for marital vows, or bandmates, considering the marital relationship was a part of the business relationship.

"side nookie" is just a term. not quite sure how intentions are worked into that term. I probably could have just as easily have said "it was all about thurston's needs" and ended the sentence there. would that make you happier with my wording? i think either are accurate statements, but I will modify it for the sake of your argument.

i shouldn't reply to this because i blew my brains out and i have lost the power of speech.

but i don't know the reasons for the affair either-- i have my own theories/imaginations but i won't talk about them because they're 100% irrelevant to this book.

i side with kim because i've always liked her more and she's more interesting and she's evidently hurt by the whole thing. but i'll stop at that-- i am not equipped to discern what went into what.

so what i'm hoping for in this thread is a little bit of wittgenstein-- whereof one cannot speak, thereof must one be silent. not because it makes me happier, but just out of respect for everyone, especially kim-- and i say this because i'm clearly biased in her favor. she did her book with flair and class, let's not drag her through the mud.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

For once i agree with !@#$! why all this gossipy speculation? We know the marriage broke up, if they wanted to share the specifics they would have. Kim shared here feelings but not her reasons and the only thing we e should focus on about their marriage is that, what she chose to share. Also the insinuated kim bashing and/or thurston vindications seem silly at best, needlessly scathing at worse. Can we get back to the book now?

[thewall91]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

i shouldn't reply to this because i blew my brains out and i have lost the power of speech.

but i don't know the reasons for the affair either-- i have my own theories/imaginations but i won't talk about them because they're 100% irrelevant to this book.

i side with kim because i've always liked her more and she's more interesting and she's evidently hurt by the whole thing. but i'll stop at that-- i am not equipped to discern what went into what.

so what i'm hoping for in this thread is a little bit of wittgenstein-- whereof one cannot speak, thereof must one be silent. not because it makes me happier, but just out of respect for everyone, especially kim-- and i say this because i'm clearly biased in her favor. she did her book with flair and class, let's not drag her through the mud.

I guess I see your point - I was replying to Magic Wheel Memory's horribly offensive breakdown of the situation, and marriage in general, which maybe silence might have been the better course, but it sure didn't feel that way. But I don't see my comments as dragging Kim through the mud, either. My intentions were quite the opposite.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by thewall91

I guess I see your point - I was replying to Magic Wheel Memory's horribly offensive breakdown of the situation, and marriage in general, which maybe silence might have been the better course, but it sure didn't feel that way. But I don't see my comments as dragging Kim through the mud, either. My intentions were quite the opposite.

i totally get it, but in replying to his horrible hypothesis (he wasn't really trying to analyze things, it was just an "example" of a possible situation, but it was so lively and detailed in its atrocity that it was easy to read like he was making claims instead of constructing a fictional scenario)-- it just perpetuates the original horror of his imagery and lends it further credence. it's like poking a rotten carcass with a stick just to have a million flies explode out of it! ha ha. best to just walk past it.

anyway-- friends, everyone? i don't believe magic wheel's intentions were bad-- just, like i said, his "example" was very (very!) poorly chosen and it sidetracked things.

IN ANY CASE

the book has so much more.

it's much more interesting i think how kim and her mentor (what was the name? i have the audio version so it's hard to look up names-- the one at otis college) would drive around LA doing aesthetic readings of the most commonplace objects and ordinary buildings-- no? i totally wanna do that now.

[whorefrost]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

I was joking with the "Team Kim" but it's cuz I love her all the time

Sorry Rob, timing of that post was bad, it wasn't intended as a reply to your good self, I realise you are quite tongue in cheek! I was writing the post directly after the previous one I wrote then when I posted I saw you had replied in the interim and it looked rude! Sorry, just to let you know we can still be friends!

[Rob Instigator]

I am friends with everyone here, even those that I argue with (especially with those).

[dead_battery]

this thread has gone too far.

kim and thurston divorced, sy split up. thats basically it. sy gave us over 3 decades of music and went longer than the vast majority of bands ever do, while putting out quality stuff the entire time. its over.

when people start making up theories and casting blame about SOMEONE ELSES RELATIONSHIP its going too far. its surprising to me that people have emotionally invested so much in it but IF YOU THINK THESE PEOPLE OWE YOU ANYTHING YOU'RE DELUSIONAL.

imagine if it was your parents divorce being discussed like this by random strangers who made up theories. imagine how fucking awful that would be.

some of the discussion has actually been intelligent and nuanced but much of it is nasty or just plain intrusive - including stuff by me trying to be funny.

see, divorce hurts everybody and has serious effects. what people who go through it dont need is others discussing it like has been done here, in a googlable forum.

some of you need to calm down because it reads like you think this is an open ended narrative and someone in sy is gonna be proved to be the wrongdoer and the band are gonna get back together again. nope. it is actually over.

if i was mod i'd delete a load of posts and close another thread that should have been deleted and had the user banned in the sonic sharing forum, but thats just me.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

I am friends with everyone here, even those that I argue with (especially with those).

Word

[Magic Wheel Memory]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

anyway-- friends, everyone? i don't believe magic wheel's intentions were bad-- just, like i said, his "example" was very (very!) poorly chosen and it sidetracked things.

Thank you for recognizing my intentions, !@#$%!, even if we don't fully agree. Perhaps my example was offensive, but in my mind, no more offensive than people vilifying a man based on a private matter that they know so little about. I felt the need to introduce some uncertainty into the discussion. Maybe it will open some minds, or maybe it will prove to be a futile effort, as you suggested.

In any case, yes, friends.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

I don't think anyone doubted your good intentions rather no matter how you sliced the cake it was a case of foot in mouth..

 

[schizophrenicroom]

i wonder if that post she mentions in her book is still up on here

[whorefrost]

I bumped it recently.