Well, in my article on depathologization I mentioned Suzan Cooke, and somewhat predictably, Cooke has responded with another rant. Well, I can always tell when I really hit a nerve. The angrier Cooke is, the more rambling Cooke's rant becomes. This one is especially bizarre.
As I have observed, Cooke does not like any criticism. Cooke seems to be afraid of her ideas being challenged, and goes to serious lengths to avoid actually having to defend them. Simply put, Cooke apparently fears the truth.
What really disturbs Cooke, though she will deny it vehemently, is that some of us see through her silliness. Cooke has serious issues, and hides behind a facade of radical chic
to avoid facing them. Cooke was a cradle Roman Catholic, which must have been hard. Of course, Rome teaches that it holds absolute authority in spiritual matters. If Rome says you are a sinner, well, you are supposed to accept it without question. Cooke couldn't, and so Cooke rebelled. But rebelling is not always so easy.
Cooke could not reconcile her feelings with the teachings of the Church, so Cooke simply rejected God, who in Cooke's mind is at fault, and did the worst thing she could think of. She told Him she no longer believes in Him. I guess that is supposed to show Him who's boss... I always feel sorry for the angry atheist, shaking a fist in God's face, and screaming "I don't believe in You! So, there!!!" And yes, I see the contradiction...they try not to.
I think part of Cooke's problem is, she doesn't realize that I see her as more of a clown than anything else. A sad clown, granted, but a self-parody that becomes more and more irrelevant with each rant.
Cooke has always tried, somewhat successfully, to cultivate a cult of personality. Years ago, Cooke was a terror on Usenet, sitting in judgement on those she deemed less worthy. I recall her referring to transssexuals who remained married to spouses as "skin transvestites." One in particular, was regularly tormented by Cooke. Years later, that same sad case still clings to Cooke's every word. A crumb of approval from Cooke is all she seeks...
I admit, I feel prey to this a bit myself. Then I realized Cooke is, well, more Kook than anything else. A sad, insecure soul, trying to relive some imagined glory from the past. And facing the fact that more and more realize that she is not so wise after all.
The real irony in this latest post is Cooke's attempt to link me to the Tea Party. Now, that is a real hoot for one simple reason. I see Cooke, and the Tea Party in much the same way. Two extremes, both wrong. You see, in politics, the truth is in the middle, not at the extremes. Cooke is at one erroneous extreme, and the Tea Party is at the other. And worse, the extremes are often closer to each other than to the Center.
I remember a guy I knew in the mid-Seventies. He was a bit of a hanger-on during the Jimmy Carter campaign. A lot like Cooke, he fancied himself an uber-radical, and bragged about his radical history. He used to go hang out at the John Birch Society headquarters where he discussed the Illuminati with the Right Wing kooks. They were coming from opposite extremes, but they were both so far gone that they actually had a lot in common.
So no, I am not Tea Party, or anywhere near Cooke politically.
But i am more than a bit amused...and now awaiting Cooke's next angry rant...but no, I will not be silenced.