Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucdavis.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ucdavis!up547413042
From: up547413042@ucdavis.UUCP (0048)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: Celebrating Differences.
Message-ID: <279@ucdavis.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 11-Nov-85 22:07:32 EST
Article-I.D.: ucdavis.279
Posted: Mon Nov 11 22:07:32 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 13-Nov-85 07:04:15 EST
References: <1262@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: University of California, Davis
Lines: 64

> 
> > What's with this anti-heterosexual kick?  "Any derogatory signs, like
> > 'breeder'"?!?
> 
> as well). Calling straight people "breeders" is a harmless, childish
> way to vent steam. I don't condone it, but worse evils demand my 
> attention.
  
It's not the greatest evil, but name- calling is not harmless. It creates
antipathy, and can lead to worse troubles. It doesn't hurt physically,
but it can hurt inside.
  
> There is a school of gay thought that says that gay people *are* 
> different.  We are the same as straights in our humanity, but different 
> in our expression of that humanity.  Since we break societal mating 
> norms, we are free to experiment with the male/female role 
> models.  Hence, we have formed a distinct gay/lesbian subculture.  You 
> can even make a good argument for a gay male subculture distinct from 
> a lesbian subculture.
  
I reccommend that it just be called school of thought. It is not restricted
to gays. Besides, what is "gay thought"? Is it really signifcantly different
than any other type of thought that it should be classified by itself?

Being gay, the concept of gay subculture rather disturbs me. I think that, since
we are different,
gay people have purposely affected in particular manners to be non- conformist.
Personally, I think many gay men I've met are affected (femme or macho), but
also I've met men both straight and gay who are effeminate but not affected.
I really don't care if somebody is effeminate, but the affectedness really
bugs me. I also dislike being pressure to become part of this whole gay
subculture. I want to be myself. I feel sometimes like I'm being forced to
conform to society (straight) from one side, and from the gay "non- conformist"
society from the other. I would much rather have diversity, and have it well
mixed up with all my gay and straight, etc friends. I prefer people who are
just natural with themselves. They act the way they feel, and express themselves
in the manner they feel most comfortable in. I think all this stuff about
subcultures, as well as acting like a man/woman are garbage. I'd rather just
act like me, and everybody else act like them. I don't care much for 
classification.

> What's the matter, Mark, do our differences bother you?  If you are 
> unable to celebrate differences, then you can concentrate on the many 
> things that straight people, and gays and lesbians have in common.

I really don't think that is Mark's problem. I can understand his position
(what I read in this article.... I didn't see the original posting), and
I'm gay myself.

> > Anyhoo, the whole message is let's stop this differentiation on meaninless
> > attributes ... sexual orientation, skin color, drug usage...
>  
> Gee, if you want to treat everyone the same, why shouldn't we stop the 
> differentiation between gay "posers" and "masculine" gay men, between 
> "butch" lesbians and "feminine" lesbians.  Why can't we celebrate 
> these differences, or will celebrating these differences in gays and 
> lesbians cause straight people to question their own male/female role 
> models?

A role model is a role model, gay or straight. How about one that failed to
differentiate based on sex or sexual orientation?


					-- Chris.