arndt@lymph.DEC (09/20/84)
To Rich Brower, et al:
Chickenhawks indeed!!!!
Is this discussion going to turn into another piece of homogenized crap
on the general topic of homosexual "lifestyles" without anyone other than
myself speaking up? Despite Ken Perlow's assertion to the contrary, I very
clearly said I was speaking against PROMISCUOUS behavior and invited others
to examine that as a "lifestyle" issue in light of its physical (AIDS, etc.)
and psychological implications. I believe I remember one, maybe two people
addressing the issue as minor points in their postings.
Did anyone see the recent T.V. "Silent Shame" show about child abuse? They
mentioned "chickenhawks". Had a member of the Rene Guyon Society (10,000
members in the U.S.) who came right out and SAID what they say in their
literature! They have a RIGHT to our kids!!!!!! WE are wrong for not letting
them have them!!! They want LAWS!!! Hey, the "right" SS will march if
this gets anywhere.
SO OTHER THAN A FEW WEAK, "I DON'T WANT YOUR KIDS", HOW DO THE MEMBERS OF
THE NET FEEL? For, against, won't march with them, not your problem (if you
believe that you're crazy), might even speak out against them (Why?)???
But read from their literature:
ANAL COPULATION
At age 4, and sometimes sooner, both male and female children WANT (italics
theirs), can easily hold after massage, and will be allowed to have a teen-
ager or older male's condom-covered penis in their anus. Tiny children will
be required to wear a small "finger stall" or "finger cot" (obtainable from
a drug store) condom from age 4 or any earlier age that they start penetrating
male and female anuses. 99% of the day there is no fecal matter in the anus.
No enema is required.
ORAL COPULATION
At age 4, and sometimes sooner, both male and female children WANT, can easily
hold, and will be allowed to have a tiny child, teenager, or older male's penis
in their mouth. This will bring an end to thumbsucking. The child will at
last get valuable hormones that appear in the mature male's ejaculate that have
been denied children in the past. Very young, teenage and adult females will
be allowed to provide sexual satisfaction with their mouths and tongues to the
penis and clitoris of young children.
------------------------------
And it goes on, PENIS-VAGINA COPULATION, MASTURBATION, NUDITY ALONE WITH NO
SEXUAL ACTIONS, but I'm sick of typing what I'm typing.
The main purpose of the organization is to convince the public that all laws
controlling nonconsensual sex must be abolished.
The above are part of a promotional package handed out by the Society as a
summary of the revisions to the California Penal Code proposed by them.
Sections PC286 Anal Copulation, PC288a Oral Copulation, see also PC261.1
Penis-Vagina Copulation and PC288 & 288.1 Masturbation of a Child.
(See THE HOMOSEXUAL NETWORK: PRIVATE LIVES AND PUBLIC POLICY, The Devin Adair
Co., by Enrique T. Rueda, 1982, p.177ff.)
NOW PLEASE NOTE: I am NOT trying to tar all homosexuals with the same brush.
I am asking the homosexual community just what they propose to do about these
people in their movement. (I know what I propose to do) Something, nothing??
It would really freak me out to see you pass over this topic as if it were
like wearing women's undergarments.
Question: Is this a topic that is just to early to push for acceptance by
the public? I mean, after the law recognizes homosexual "rights" is this
the next barrier? Is there any last barrier? Or will someone really marry
a tree?
Awaiting the two types of reply,
Ken Arndt
"Who knows what evil lerks in the hearts of homosexuals? Ken Arndt knows"
"When you've got your ammo, you've got it ALL"
sdyer@bbncca.ARPA (Steve Dyer) (09/21/84)
I must say that Ken seems to read the most amazing literature; I certainly
haven't seen anything quite like this before. What mailing lists is he
on anyway?
Anyway, there was a rather long discussion of NAMBLA and children's rights
very early on in net.motss, consisting of one person speaking out for total
self-determination for kids and even infants (in the large sense--this was
not limited to "intergenerational sexuality", as it was genteely referred
to) and most everyone else saying how bonkers that sounded to them. I
don't think there's much more to be said here.
All main-stream national gay organizations that I know of explicitly try
to dissociate themselves from any such groups as NAMBLA. The key to
remember here is that "child/adult" sex is NOT a gay rights issue, and the
only groups who seem to want to make it one are the anti-gay forces and the
members of such groups themselves. Even in Arndt's rather lurid excerpts
from pedophiliac literature, there is interchangeable mention of both
female and male children: where are the gay issues here? Why did Arndt not
take this stuff to net.kids, or perhaps to net.singles and net.social,
where he could take the straight community to task for their own shameful
members? Naturally not, for he has no corresponding axe to grind there.
One thing is clear: net.motss is not the place for this discussion.
Arndt is being just a touch disingenuous when he claims not wanting to
"tar" "homosexuals" with this brush, rivaling Paul DuBois' rejoiner,
"Why, I'm only ASKING a QUESTION."
Just as in the community at large, there is no one voice in the gay
community (and it is debatable that one can even speak of THE gay
community.) Still, I think it is safe to say that only a very small
minority supports the aims of such groups, with most people either
against or indifferent.
One last comment about Arndt's feeling that his comments about AIDS and
promiscuity haven't received a response. Nope, they haven't, and it's no
wonder. Actually, it would have made a fairly interesting discussion, but
unfortunately Arndt wrote off all his credibility with a large majority of
net.motss with his earlier obnoxious behavior. It's actually pretty
hilarious to see the recent spate of defenses of Arndt: all the guy needs
to do is put on a tie, and suddenly he becomes reconstructed in the guise
of martyr. Sorry, folks, all I have to judge him by are his words, and
by my count, his recent postings haven't even BEGUN to offset his earlier
behavior. We'll see.
--
/Steve Dyer
{decvax,linus,ima}!bbncca!sdyer
sdyer@bbncca.ARPArichard@apple.UUCP (Richard Johnson) (09/22/84)
[manges-moi] What is the entire homosexual community going to do about pedophiles ? This assertion is about as ludicrous as asking the entire black community of the United States to "do" something about the Zebra killings in SF, that idiot who called Judiasm a "gutter religion", and any other persons who commit unusual acts and happen to be black. And, the heterosexual community has its share of pedophiles, too - do you intend to "do" something about that ? Why do you believe that the majority of pedophiles are gay ? I saw "Silent Shame" also and it was mostly about straights. Really, Ken, for someone who usually garners respect from this phosphor, you have gone a bit too far. Comments ? Richard Johnson
ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow) (09/24/84)
-- >> Is this discussion going to turn into another piece of homogenized >> crap on the general topic of homosexual "lifestyles" without anyone >> other than myself speaking up? Despite Ken Perlow's assertion to >> the contrary, I very clearly said I was speaking against PROMISCUOUS >> behavior and invited others to examine that as a "lifestyle" issue >> in light of its physical (AIDS, etc.) and psychological implications... Wait a sec--I said that Arndt here was not distinguishing homosexuality from promiscuous behavior irrespective of sexual preference. And he wasn't, and isn't, since homosexuals and net.motss are the *ONLY* targets of his criticism. >> NOW PLEASE NOTE: I am NOT trying to tar all homosexuals with the same >> brush. I am asking the homosexual community just what they propose to >> do about these people in their movement. (I know what I propose to do) >> Something, nothing?? It would really freak me out to see you pass over >> this topic as if it were like wearing women's undergarments. >> Question: Is this a topic that is just to early to push for acceptance >> by the public? I mean, after the law recognizes homosexual "rights" is >> this the next barrier? Is there any last barrier? Or will someone >> really marry a tree? Oh boy, another California lunatic fringe group, and Arndt goes all to pieces. So Arndt, are you German, or of German heritage? If so, what are you going to do about Germany's neo-Nazis? Or closer to home, the American Nazi Party? When you hear Meir Kahane speak, do you assume that he speaks for all Jews? Or Jerry Falwell for all Christians? Sometimes the best strategy w/r/t loonies is to ignore them. -- *** *** JE MAINTIENDRAI ***** ***** ****** ****** 23 Sep 84 [2 Vendemiaire An CXCIII] ken perlow ***** ***** (312)979-7188 ** ** ** ** ..ihnp4!ihuxq!ken *** ***
mario@astrovax.UUCP (Mario Vietri) (09/24/84)
Dear netters, I have been following the conversation somewhat episodically over the last few months, due to problems with local (computer!) authorities, but I could not help noticing the extent to which the responses to Mr. Arndt and his clones have managed to force their way into nearly every single letter written to this group. This has now progressed to the point where all of the letters currently available at my institution in this newsgroup are either written by the Arndt Gang, or are replies to them. This situation is not new: many of you probably remember that Arndt managed for some time to disrupt the debate also in net.women, from which he was eventually expelled, never to reappear again. It is unlikely, though, that this will happen here too: differently from that case, now Mr. Arndt is persuaded to be waging a Holy War, and nothing we say will make him desist from it. You all know how impermeable he is to every sort of argumentation, how uninterested he is in listening, and how badly he has damaged discussion in this group. There are two possible soultions to this problem: the first is what was proposed some time ago in net.women, i.e. the creation of a private mail group from which any non-constructive contribution could be easily excluded. This feminist mail group is now alive and prospering, has received more than 300 contributions, and the environment is so pleasant that quite a number of people have told intimate personal stories. This is a possible way out. Alternatively, one may reason as follows: women's movements have gained a degree of acceptance which gay-rights movements are very far from achieving, so that the retreat into a private mailgroup, which would be quite acceptable for women, is to be considered a political defeat in this case. Holding the debate in a public forum like this is also a part of 'coming out', and we shouldn't allow Mr. Arndt and his clones to shut evryone up, and lock the closet again. I see some pluses in this line of argument. But in this case, we should probably accept the obvious: no debate is possible with Mr. Arndt and the hypocrites who disapprove of his ways and approve of his ideas (which ones?) and of his carefully researched data (straight out of Jerry Falwell's pocket). We should then propose and enforce a policy of total neglect of Mr. Arndt, one by which none of his arguments is mentioned in any contribution, none of his lurid jokes and insinuations are answered, none of his clones' support respected. This is very different from rejecting debate: it would only mean restoring this forum to its original function (message # 1): >Net.motss is designed to foster discussion on a wide variety of topics, such as >health problems, parenting, relationships, clearances, job security and >many others. Gay members of USENET will find this a supportive environment >for the discussion of issues which have immediate impact on their everyday >lives. Those who aren't gay have an opportunity to be informed by the >discussion, and are encouraged to read the news items and contribute their >own questions and opinions. > >Net.motss is emphatically NOT a newsgroup for the discussion of whether >homosexuality is good or bad, natural or unnatural. Nor is it a place >where conduct unsuitable for the net will be allowed or condoned. >Rather, like every USENET news group, it is an opportunity for people >all across the world to express their opinions, exchange ideas, and >come to appreciate the diversity within the USENET membership. Please do comment. Mario Vietri Princeton University Astrophysics {allegra,akgua,burl,cbosgd,decvax,ihnp4,kpno,princeton,vax135}!astrovax!mario