Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site wivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!bbncca!wivax!dyer From: dyer@wivax.UUCP (Stephen Dyer) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: faggots and dykes Message-ID: <19626@wivax.UUCP> Date: Sun, 17-Jun-84 21:02:38 EDT Article-I.D.: wivax.19626 Posted: Sun Jun 17 21:02:38 1984 Date-Received: Mon, 18-Jun-84 00:15:28 EDT References: <1059@nsc.UUCP>, <7450@rochester.UUCP> Organization: Wang Institute, Tyngsboro, Ma. 01879 Lines: 46 >Has it ever occurred to any of you progressive, right-thinking types, >who have been defending gay rights so righteously and at such great >length, that you are engaged in just the same kind of exercise that >authors of articles such as "faggots and dykes" are? >... >If the thesis is tolerance, as some of you are claiming, feel free to >actively display your own. >... >If the thesis is that all gays are normal, contributive, well-adjusted >members of society, then we may have a bright future to look forward >to, because straights certainly aren't. I don't remember reading anything which would claim that gay people have an edge on humanity or tolerance--perhaps you'd like to point out the article. The whole point of the "right-thinkers" in this discussion is to show that sexual attraction to members of one's own sex HAS NO BEARING on the well-roundedness and maturity of individuals nor on their efficacy as successful members of their society (save for the discrimination which they encounter.) There are screwed up gay people, there are screwed up straight people--the *problem* is that many people use homosexuality as a discriminant to justify their own attitudes without any real evidence. This is a disservice to the people being discriminated against, not to mention all of society. As for "tolerance", I do not agree that those who took exception to Jeff's or, more seriously, harpo!jrl's article were guilty of intolerance. There are ways to take exception to ideas posted here without spraying hate and invective as we saw in the harpo!jrl article. I think that we can reliably say that that article was inappropriately phrased, even as the sentiments were genuine. To be "tolerant" does not mean to lack critical judgement. Examine for a minute the article by harpo!jrl. What is the point that it is trying to make? Do you detect a difference between the sentiments: "gays should remain in the closet forever; discrimination is deserved; gays are fundamentally imperfect" and "I can't accept homosexuality as a valid lifestyle." The first represents the facist imposition of a personal morality upon all members of society as well as a empirically unjustified claim, the second, merely a statement of personal belief. One really cannot take excessive exception to the latter, though it is often worthwhile trying to express one's own views to let that person know where you stand. With some luck, they might even understand you! -- /Steve Dyer decvax!bbncca!sdyer sdyer@bbncca.ARPA