Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site bbncca.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!bbncca!rrizzo
From: rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: A thought on the nature of ... defenses
Message-ID: <783@bbncca.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 15-Jun-84 14:13:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: bbncca.783
Posted: Fri Jun 15 14:13:21 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 16-Jun-84 00:47:06 EDT
References: <925@ihuxi.UUCP>
Organization: Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, Ma.
Lines: 32

Mike,
	Your original message was hardly a request for "detached"
or "scientific" discussion/inquiry:  the  questions themselves
that you ask are so utterly mired in the bizarre assumptions and
distorted perceptions of homophobia that they're as misguided and
unpromising as, say, Arthur Jensen's pointless musings on IQ test
and racial differences.  My reply doesn't overdramatize the situ-
ation, but was meant to equate it with similar things like racist
"science" (or "creationism" for that matter).  

	Your questions display not only a primitive notion of
biology that I find startling (but not unique on the net), but
a very bigoted perception of issues.

	I don't know where to begin to reply, quite frankly, or
if it's worth it.  But you might start by reading C.A. Tripp's
THE HOMOSEXUAL MATRIX (available in paperback), particularly
the chapter "The Origins of Heterosexuality".  And continue
by looking for sociobiological literature on the issues (sexu-
ality, reproduction, etc.) by biologists such as Edward O. Wilson,
James Weinreich, etc.

	Yet I think this reading program may be off-target and
premature. YOUR problem seems to be simply bigotry.  And no one
can make you deal with that except yourself.  First you must have
the desire to get rid of it, which I certainly DON'T detect in
your messages.

	That's about all there is to say,

					Cheers,
					Ron Rizzo