richw@ada-uts.UUCP (12/31/85)
In my opinion, all of your questions have a "No" answer.
I haven't read the book, so take this with a grain of salt, if you like.
The book description is fine as it stands. It could be more specific,
sure, but I don't think you should have trouble identifying with the
gay character(s) of the book.
Other than the differences in "physical specifics" between gay and
straight sex, I don't see how gay relations ALWAYS differ from straight
relations. Unless you can come up with some specific characteristic
of gay relationships which a) are unique to gay relationships and
b) you can never relate to, I don't think you have any reason to
avoid books including gay relationships. Gay relationships are
just relationships.
Of course, the "physical specifics" of gay sex may be what you want to
avoid thinking about or trying to relate to. If that's the case,
I still don't think the description need be more specific. Some people
are disgusted by the idea of gay sex; disgust is in the gut of the
beholder, I guess. But if you don't like thinking about gay sex,
that's your problem; I might not want to read books about women that
cheat on men because I'm disgusted by such behavior, but it's not
reasonable for me to expect book summarizers to warn me of such books.
Another (unfortunate) unique characteristic of gay relationships is
that the gays involved have to (today, at least) deal with the social
stigmas attached to being gay. No, straight people cannot truly
identify with this, but I don't think this is reason to stop reading.
I'm actually curious to hear of any aspects of gay relationships
which are unique TO gay relationships. A friend of mine is gay
and I've never been able to see such differences in his relationship
with his male friends.
-- Rich Wagner
P.S. Some people think that being able to talk about common
problems/joys is an important characteristic of friends.
If you think book descriptions should be more explicit
about the type of sex they describe, then it seems like
you could also conclude that people should wear "Straight"
or "Gay" buttons so one can better choose friends...aegroup@tekigm.UUCP (Dennis Ward) (01/07/86)
> > In my opinion, all of your questions have a "No" answer. > I haven't read the book, so take this with a grain of salt, if you like. > > The book description is fine as it stands. It could be more specific, > sure, but I don't think you should have trouble identifying with the > gay character(s) of the book. > ..... [much deleted] ... > > -- Rich Wagner > > P.S. Some people think that being able to talk about common > problems/joys is an important characteristic of friends. > If you think book descriptions should be more explicit > about the type of sex they describe, then it seems like > you could also conclude that people should wear "Straight" > or "Gay" buttons so one can better choose friends... Let's see, we could have all of the Jews wear yellow stars of David, the homosexuals could wear lavender triangles, etc. For those of you youngsters (i.e. born after 1945) this was tried in the 1930's in Germany by the Nazi's. The final end result was over 6 million Jews killed, x million Gypsies, slavs, homosexuals, etc. and the biggest war to date, along with the development of the atomic bomb to stop the war. (:.|) (sour smiley face) Seriously, it is things like this that lead to what happened during WWII. It starts with censorship, bookburning, etc. Each group is lead to hate and distrust the next. Jews, Catholics, Masons, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc. were all made to wear identifying tags. All were lead to believe that one group by one group "they" were the ones causing all of the problems. What really bothers me is that some of the same things are now happening in America. We are having censorship of magazines now. What next? I used to be able to see magazines such as High Society, Stag, etc. on the newstands, they have disappeared. The magazines that do appear for sale are totally censored now by the publishers for fear of persecution by the law/or various hate groups. I see that schools are removing books as being offensive (i.e. Tom Sawyer, various classics, etc.) due to language or what is even worse unpopular views expressed in the books. I thought that this type of thing only happened in the deep South U.S. but it is happening in Washington state and in other areas in the Pacific NW. Personally I find homosexuality to be offensive, but I think that everyone has the right to their own lifestyle, no matter how I feel about it. Sorry about the soapbox, but the continuing series of articles about truth in book selling (a la gay sex in books) has gotten to me. -- Signature: Accessories Engineering