From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: Castro Street (Re: Two threads:  women posting and "cures" and its spinoffs)
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:08:29 GMT


Based on a private email conversation, I decided to go
back and re-read this.

In article <1992Dec12.014224.8123@spdcc.com>, dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
|> In article <168BAA428.TMCCART3@ua1vm.ua.edu> TMCCART3@ua1vm.ua.edu writes:
|> >As I see it, the problem that has come clear after all my badgering about
|> >female invisibility on soc.motss is that (some of) the men here see things
|> >in terms of two simple equations:
|> >Visibility/attention = leering
|> >Lesbian/women's issues = how women manage to have sex without dicks
|>  
|> And I think you're out of line here.

Exactly, and I've commented on it.

|> >I'm not imagining this. One of my dear brothers on soc.motss, once he
|> >got up the nerve to ask a question, could come up with nothing more
|> >insightful than "What do lesbians do in sex clubs?" Perhaps I'm being
|> >too hard on him, but I hear questions like that enough from *straight*
|> >guys. I expect better here.
|>  
|> Listen, Greg Parkinson doesn't have to get his nerve up to ask anyone
|> a question.  You think he's getting his rocks off asking you that?
|> Fuck you too.  Why don't _you_ get a clue, sister, and realize where
|> _you're_ saying this?

Again, I agree.  Tracey way overreacted.  She took my
question and evaluated it using her not-unreasonable
stereotypes of men in general.  Having gone off in a
similar way to heterosexuals, I can understand it even
if I wish she would have thought about it first.

|> What's your point?  It's insulting to women to ask them about the
|> newly popular lesbian sex clubs?  That REAL lesbians are somehow above
|> this?  Where's Tsilke when we need her?

This is a very real possibility, but it's based on a
not-unreasonable stereotype of anti-sex women.  Just
as Tracey was out of line making the assumption she 
did about me, I think Steve makes the same mistake here.

|> >Gay culture is not restricted to raves, and show tunes, and Harvey Fierstein
|> >(sp?) and any number of othher gay male icons/activities. Those cultural
|> >references dominate soc.motss, understandably so because men dominate soc.
|> >motss by sheer numbers.
|> 
|> I think you're being deliberately selective and painting a manifestly
|> false picture of what goes on here in soc.motss.
|> 
|> I have no interest in raves, show tunes, much about Harvey Fierstein
|> (wow, his commencement speech seems to have made a BIG impression on
|> you, huh?  Of course, it had nothing to say to _you_ as a lesbian,
|> did it?) or very likely, just about anything that you might imagine is
|> a "gay male activity", or at least what passes for same in Tuscaloosa.

I agree with this, but there's no appreciation of the
fact that in the same way the world in general seems
very very straight, soc.motss probably seems very very
male, and these are just some examples.

|> >But it's not just a numbers game. Men here seem to
|> >be aggressively uninterested in gay culture that's *not* male -- witness the
|> >quickness (I know, I know, I've said it before) with which references to
|> >lesbian culture and icons are sidetracked into something the men find
|> >more interesting.
|> 
|> Hey, whatja think of Phranc's latest album?

Steve may be making the point that there is no
"gay male culture" just as there is no "lesbian culture".
How many lesbian Phranc fans are there here?

And Tracey's comment is phrased in a way to make it 
sound like men go "euwwwww YUK *lesbian* stuff - 
change it quick!" as opposed to the reality of
the usenet style of commenting with whatever comes 
to mind, giving a very stream-of-consciousness feeling.

|> >We lesbians know a lot about your culture; we have little
|> >choice. How much do you know about ours? How much do you care?
|>  
|> Have you met Donald Agarrat?

The point being - does Tracey know about black gay male
culture?  Pointing out that "your culture" where "your"
is "all gay males" is not a well-defined term.  It doesn't
change the fact that there are a lot more activities
geared towards men than there are for women.

|> >I can't make you care. I can ask politely that you refrain from doing
|> >everything in your power to wrest a thread away from lesbian/women's
|> >issues and steer it back into yet another gay male topic;
|> 
|> So when are you going to start?

I didn't get this.

|> >failing that,
|> >I can ask again that you change the Subject: line to acknowledge that
|> >you *have* sidetracked the topic.
|>  
|> That'll be the day.  Don't hold your breath.

Sounding insulting, but referring to Usenet in 
general - this sort of thing, despite good intentions,
just doesn't seem to work.

|> >I can also ask that you be more conscious of the presence of women
|> >in the struggle of gayfolk -- men and women -- for equality and accep-
|> >tance.
|> 
|> Right.  Mea culpa, mea culpa <beating breast>.  You're going to have to
|> come up with more cogent stuff than this.  You sound like you just walked
|> out of your women's studies class.

A bit insensitive to the fact that whether or not the
feelings were well-focused or well thought out, they
are still real and have a basis in reality.

Off to a bad start and it's all my fault :-(

-- 
Greg Parkinson                  Phone: 212-657-7814  Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street        E-Mail: glp@fig.citib.com
New York, New York  10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.
Newsgroups: soc.motss