From: joe@spdcc.com (Joseph Francis)
Subject: Re: Arne Adolphson, Moron At Large
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 17:45:52 GMT

In article <73237@cup.portal.com> Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison) writes:
>Jess Anderson writes:
>>Are you in possession of yourself?  If so, why are you
>
>Yes.
>
>>shouting?  (I believe you must mean "Not all gay men are,
>
>Because Arne either willfully or not doesn't seem to get the
>message; naive to think that "shouting" would help get the 
>idea across, I concede.
>
>>rather than "All gay men are not," by the way.)
>
>A difference without a difference, methinks.

I know plenty of gay men that are queens. It is like saying "I like
what I grow" and "I grow what I like". I like my beard, but I
certainly don't have any hair on my back, as much as I would like for
it to grow.

>>But the point here is, you're being more than a little
>>acid-tongued yourself, and you've consistently excoriated
>>Arne for some little time.  There can hardly be a sentient
>
>True enough; but I don't manufacture items to deride people
>over, as Arne has done with me. Nor do I go off on people
>at (seemingly) random.

I still don't know what it is about Arne, as opposed to Kennedy, that
you don't like. You say he's a sharp-tongued vile slavering
contemptible queen-bitch (as opposed to bitch-queen, 'methinks'
different). So what makes him different from, say, Eric Raymond, John
Sculley, George Bush, or Tina Brown? Are these negative qualities?

>>soul in these quarters who doesn't know of your contempt.
>>Why, then, is it necessary to say it again?
>
>Steve Dyer asked.  ;-)
>
>>Here's the button:
>>I would like to know how you define "queen" such that you  
>>are not one.
>
>Simple -- any title that Arne claims for himself is something
>I want nothing to do with.

1) Male 2) Bespectacled 3) Pubic-Hair endowed 4) Etc.

>>I would like you to be very specific about
>>this, and include reliable guides for a taxonomy that
>>divides the universe of gay men into queens and not-queens.
>>I would like you to assign the following persons to the
>>appropriate category, as you define it:
>
>[List deleted]
>
>Well, I don't know Howard Faye well enough -- net wise or
>in person -- to say anything.  But in accord with what I
>just said -- Arne put himself on the list.  He has previously
>stated that he sees being a "bitchy queen" as the preeminent
>mode of social interaction for gay men. I *strongly* disagree.

Have you ever been to a bears UK meeting? No? I thought not. The
Empire pub, each Wednesday, Thursday, and Saturday night. Drinks
upstairs, shorts-wetting downstairs, in the conveniently
floor-to-ceiling tiled bathroom. Now, one would think that with a room
full of handsome, bearded men who are interested in meeting other
handsome bearded men that there would be little 'infighting' and
cliqueishness, etc. However, these men can be just as queeny as
anything I can imagine. Bearhunt #2 center-spread posterbear is known
as "Squeaky". Brian Darbishire,a very famous figure from the British
leather scene (which makes the US leather scene look like white
gogoboots by comparison), is always referred to as "Beryl" (don't ever
call him that to his face). Queens. Friends.

BTW. You don't have to be gay to be a bitchy queen. James McNeil
Whistler was a classic very good straight male bitchy queen (time to
get out the history books). I won't even talk about Churchhill.

I've tried to be good-humored about it all. I'm waiting for this to
end, but can't resist continuing it. Am I being foolish, or bitchy.

-- 
US Jojo; damp, slighly soiled, but tasty nonetheless.
Newsgroups: soc.motss