fisher@dssdev.DEC (Gerry --- Hopelessly Obscure) (11/05/85)
> What's with this anti-heterosexual kick? "Any derogatory signs, like > 'breeder'"?!? Mark, if you had been following the discussion concerning sign language, you would know that there are derogatory signs for gays and lesbians. This person was only curious if there were similar signs for straight people; she/he was not being anti-heterosexual. Stop being so defensive! No, calling straight people names is not the most mature response that gays and lesbians can muster, but you have to keep in mind that many straight people are oppressive threats to our health and well-being (some gay and bisexual people are probably threats to our well-being, 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. > "Well, they hate me, so I wanna hate them." How fucking stupid. What in If you need to use this kind of language, take it to net.flame where it is appropriate. How stupid? Probably. How human? Definitely! > Doing so says that homosexuals are not people ... are > different ... want to be different, want to not fit in ... this isn't > coming out right, it's simply deriding affecting a pose just because you > think you should Are you referring to effeminacy in gay men? Are you referring to masculine traits in lesbians? Are you saying that all gays and lesbians "pose"? How can you be so sure if it is a pose or if it is actually the way the person was meant to act? Or, are you opposed to gay men acting different from straight men, lesbians acting different from straight women? 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. 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. > 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? Just throwing out a few ideas. Maybe someone else can take them and run with them... Gerry Fisher ...decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-dssdev!fisher *************************************************************************** Nashua, NH: Where the men are men, and the sheep are nervous.
up547413042@ucdavis.UUCP (0048) (11/12/85)
> > > 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.
rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (11/13/85)
<followup to Chris> Would you say you're a Q or an R? What would you think about a man in a dress? If you want diversity, don't you think that your being "rather doubtful" about "the concept of a gay subculture" and, it seems, about the sub- cultures themselves is somewhat contradictory? Finally, if there's society (of any kind), there's always social pressures. The peculiar thing about social approval is that it affects you only if you let it. If you want to be yourself, well........be it (don't just think it, to rearrange a motsser's signoff) ! "Know thyself" --- Socrates Cheers, Ron Rizzo PS: Since I was the one who asked about derogatory ASL signs for hetero- sexuals, let me just say that I've found the few responses pretty odd. net.motss seems touchy about this, maybe due to a reluctance to appear "heterophobic"? I haven't noticed a similar "sensitivity" among straight and gay netters for discussing the various stereotypes or slurs pertaining to homosexuality. Don't you think that's a strange situation, hmm? Finally, I'm surprised to hear Mark McEntee's blast (wow! I haven't measured a flame at THAT temperature in this newsgroup in a long time) described as understandable. A flame is a flame is a flame.....(I should know! :=( ) I can "understand" it, ie, as symptomatic of a (passing?) attitude, but it seems related to nothing real. Keep chargin' !
up547413042@ucdavis.UUCP (0048) (11/16/85)
> <followup to Chris> > > Would you say you're a Q or an R? I'm a Z (neither a Q or an R, and I *do* know what you're talking about. I don't believe in the theory) > > What would you think about a man in a dress? > I don't even care much for dresses on women... they seem impractical to me. > If you want diversity, don't you think that your being "rather doubtful" > about "the concept of a gay subculture" and, it seems, about the sub- > cultures themselves is somewhat contradictory? > No. A subculture is a mold. To fit into something just because you what to fit is what I don't like. And I resent having to fit into anything. Diversity is greater if each person has his own culture (so if you want to take subculture to the extreme (one per person), then that might be nice. > Finally, if there's society (of any kind), there's always social pressures. > The peculiar thing about social approval is that it affects you only if > you let it. If you want to be yourself, well........be it (don't just > think it, to rearrange a motsser's signoff) ! That's not true unless you have to survive in a vacuum. All things affect all people in one way or another. > > "Know thyself" --- Socrates > The saying was engraved at an oracle... Are you sure he said that? -- Chris
rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (11/18/85)
One person does not a culture make (even Robinson Crusoe needed a Friday). Socrates may not have coined the adage "know thyself", but he refers to it in a number of dialogues. No person is a Pacific atoll (at all!), Ron Rizzo
lo@harvard.ARPA (Bert S.F. Lo) (11/18/85)
> > Would you say you're a Q or an R? > > I'm a Z (neither a Q or an R, and I *do* know what you're talking about. > I don't believe in the theory) Well, I don't know what you're talking about, so I ask: What is a Q, an R and a Z ? What is the Theory ? _____________________Bert S.F. Lo (lo@harvard.HARVARD.EDU)_____________________
rob@ptsfb.UUCP (Rob Bernardo) (11/19/85)
In article <512@harvard.ARPA> lo@harvard.ARPA (Bert S.F. Lo) writes: >> > Would you say you're a Q or an R? >> >> I'm a Z (neither a Q or an R, and I *do* know what you're talking about. >> I don't believe in the theory) > >Well, I don't know what you're talking about, so I ask: > >What is a Q, an R and a Z ? What is the Theory ? A few months ago I excerpted a Christopher Street article that presented a theory on different ways in which we grow up accepting our homosexuality and how it affects our tolerance of difference gay ways of being. The posting was long, but if there is enough demand, I will repost it. If not, I will e-mail it to the few who'd like to see it.