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