From: richter@hera.Berkeley.EDU (Jean Richter)
Newsgroups: rec.music.gdead
Subject: Re: Lets put this one to rest...
Date: 19 Nov 1992 01:20:01 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: hera.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Nov18.225632.15775@uvaarpa.Virginia.EDU> GLADSTONE@csmcmvax.bitnet writes:

>I will respond to the reactions from my previous article en masse, and
>then I will let the matter drop.  The responses ranged from very angry,
>to very informative.  I feel that I have come away with a deeper understanding,
>and thank those who took the time to reason with me.  I also understand the
>anger in some replies, and take no offense, and hope none was given.
>I did get some positive replies by email, but the group response was,
>well, mixed at best.  The tone on the net has been angry enough of late,
>with the emotional roller coaster we have been on with Jerry and all.
>In retrospect, this was not a good time to grate on irritated nerves.
>Even as Devil's advocate, I will tone things down for a while, till we
>are all happy campers again.  PEACE

Pardon me, but as long as my right to keep a job, or live in the
housing of my choice, or marry the partner of my choosing, keeps
being taken away based on my lover's gender, whether it's in
Colorado, Oregon, or right here in "liberal" California, and
as long as the religious right bigots have well-meaning but essentially
clueless people like you do their dirty work for them,  I am 
*not* going to be a "happy camper".

>|From: richter@hera.Berkeley.EDU (Jean Richter)
>|Subject: Re: WARNING !   FLAMEBAIT with minimal ODC  Read at your own risk!
>|Date: 17 Nov 1992 23:19:12 GMT
>Flamebait was not the intent.  Perhaps 'controversial material' would have
>better expressed my intentions, which were not to start a stupid net.war.

Yeah right. Mark a posting "FLAMEBAIT" and then claim you didn't want flames.

>
>|In article <1992Nov17.214016.8674@uvaarpa.Virginia.EDU>
>| GLADSTONE@csmcmvax.bitnet writes:
>|
>|        [tons of misinformation and homophobic diatribe, which I
>|         won't dignify by responding to - followup in
>|         alt.politics.homosexuality or somewhere if you feel it
>|         necessary to start the inevitable flamewar]
>Homophobic implies a phobia.  I assure you I have no fear of the 10% or so.
>I have pondered the evolutionary aspects of homosexuality, and have come
>to believe they are an important part of the mix.  It is not hard to see
>areas in which homosexuals excel.  This may be due to lack of resource
>drain in raising children, or just jumping off of our lemming like cultural
>bandwagon earlier than most. Still an area of speculation.

Sorry, I stand by what I said. Your original article was dripping
with homophobia, specifically fear of those big bad nasty gay men,
all of whom are just waiting to find a way to give you AIDS. 

>|Funny, in the 14 years that I've been going to shows in the Bay Area and
>|elsewhere I've never once been hassled for being openly lesbian (and
>|that includes some pretty unsubtle public displays of affection).
>Physical affection between people of all sexes is not an unusual sight,
>and is not percieved by the masses as sexual, rather as a celebration
>of life.  Same sex lip kissing is a very rare sight.

Uh, maybe you didn't understand what I meant. :-) When I said unsubtle,
I meant *really* unsubtle - like, you'd never mistake me and my lover
for friendly straight girls. :-)

>|One more thing - gay is an adjective, not a noun.
>Not to pick nits, but as the Hackers Dictionary points out, we are moving
>towards a purely positional grammer, like Chinese.  I feel on safe ground
>using this word as a noun or an adjective.

I wasn't making a grammar flame - I was pointing out that using gay 
as a noun pisses off lots of gay people. I'm sure you can find the
word "nigger" in a dictionary; that doesn't mean it won't piss off
people if you refer to them that way.

>Jean, I seem to have angered you the most, so to you I hand the first olive
>branch.  I see lesbians, of whom I have known many closely, as qualitativly
>different from gay males.  I know of stable relationships going on two
>decades, with some of them being our best and oldest of friends.
>Given that a lot of males are 'pigs' or unsuited for forming a long term,
>faithful, sensitive and tender relationship, I see the choice of many
>lesbians as the logical alternative.  

Sorry, I'm not buying this "dykes good, fags bad" dichotomy.
Your invalid stereotypes are showing...

>I guess my only beef is that you
>demand equal access for yourselves, while denying it to others.

Huh? Mind pointing out to me where I did that?

Really, I don't think you're a bad person or anything -
but your postings show a remarkable lack of understanding about
what it's like to be a gay person in this society. Use less
condescension and stereotyping when you talk to us and you'll be 
a lot less likely to piss us off.

>Fair thee well, let your life proceed by it's own design.
>Nothing to tell, let the words be yours, I am done with mine.
>Gladstone>

ditto. 

Jean Richter
richter@hera.Berkeley.EDU
ucbvax!hera!richter